acknowledgements...date 01/07/2019 issue: 2.0 ii acknowledgements this report has been produced by...

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report has been produced by the Consultant for UNDP Pakistan and Ministry of Planning Development and Reform (SDG Section), Government of Pakistan. The research study involved wider consultations with key governmental and private sector stakeholders at federal, provincial and area level in Pakistan. Without the valuable advice, input and support of these stakeholders, this report would not have been possible. Therefore, the Consultant would like to express his gratitude to all those who contributed to this study with their expertise, advice and knowledge. The Consultant would like to particularly thank the Project Director, Ministry of Planning Development and Reform (SDG Section), and the Federal and Provincial/ Area SDG Support Units for their facilitation and support throughout.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................... ii

List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................... v

List of Figures ......................................................................................................................................... vi

Acronyms .............................................................................................................................................. vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................ 1

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 8

1.1 General Background ................................................................................................................ 8

1.2 What is Quality Education? ..................................................................................................... 9

1.3 Education after the 18th Amendment .................................................................................... 9

1.4 Minimum National Standards for Quality Education ............................................................ 10

1.5 TORs of the Consultancy ....................................................................................................... 10

1.6 Structure of the Report ......................................................................................................... 12

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE/ MATERIAL............................................................................................. 13

2.1 The Road to Quality Education ............................................................................................. 13

2.2 Gaps in Policies and Plans to Impart Quality Education ....................................................... 16

3. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................ 19

3.1 Semi-Structured Questionnaires ........................................................................................... 19

3.2 Data and Information Collection ........................................................................................... 20

3.3 Key Stakeholders Consulted during the Consultancy ........................................................... 20

3.4 Methodological Challenges ................................................................................................... 23

4. RESULTS......................................................................................................................................... 25

4.1 Federal/ICT level ................................................................................................................... 25

4.2 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa ............................................................................................................ 32

4.3 Balochistan ............................................................................................................................ 52

4.4 Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK) ............................................................................................... 64

4.5 Gilgit Baltistan (GB) ............................................................................................................... 67

4.6 Punjab ................................................................................................................................... 75

4.7 Sindh ..................................................................................................................................... 83

5. RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................... 99

6. ANNEXES ..................................................................................................................................... 105

Annex 1: List of Respondents of FGDs ............................................................................................ 105

Annex 2: Details of Respondents (Interviews) ................................................................................ 110

Annex 3: Questionnaires/ Tools of Data Collection ........................................................................ 121

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

iv

Annex 4: Contribution of Key UN Agencies/ INGO’s for Implementing MSQE ............................... 122

Annex 5: References ....................................................................................................................... 123

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

v

List of Tables

Table 1: Key Stakeholders Consulted during the Consultancy ............................................................. 21

Table 2: Progress of NCC against various objectives ............................................................................ 28

Table 3: Total Expenditure on Education (Rs million) ........................................................................... 30

Table 4: ICT/ Federal Education Budget Allocation 2013-18 ................................................................ 31

Table 5: ICT/ Federal Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18 ............................................................. 32

Table 6: Basic Facilities in Schools in KP ................................................................................................ 40

Table 7: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Budget Allocation 2013-18 ................................................. 50

Table 8: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18 .............................................. 51

Table 9: Balochistan Education Budget Allocation 2013-18 ................................................................. 63

Table 10: Balochistan Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18 ............................................................ 64

Table 11: Education Budget of AJK 2013-2018 ..................................................................................... 67

Table 12: Summary of Education Indicators for Gilgit-Baltistan ........................................................... 73

Table 13: Estimated Budget for Implementation of GB Education Strategy (2015-2030) ................... 74

Table 14: Punjab Education Budget Allocation 2013-18....................................................................... 82

Table 15: Punjab Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18 ................................................................... 83

Table 16: Utilization of Budget in Sindh ................................................................................................ 85

Table 17: Sindh Education Budget Allocation 2013-18 ......................................................................... 97

Table 18: Sindh Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18 ..................................................................... 98

Table 19: Budget (Existing and Required) ............................................................................................. 99

Table 20: Teachers (Existing and Required) ........................................................................................ 100

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

vi

List of Figures

Figure 1: Communication and Coordination in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa ................................................. 45

Figure 2: Teacher Absenteeism in KP .................................................................................................... 47

Figure 3: School Level Indicators in KP .................................................................................................. 49

Figure 4: Single factor priority analysis ................................................................................................. 55

Figure 5: Multiple factor priority analysis ............................................................................................. 55

Figure 6: Communication and Coordination in Balochistan ................................................................. 59

Figure 7: Relationship between Organizations in Balochistan ............................................................. 60

Figure 8: Allied Institutions of the SED Balochistan .............................................................................. 61

Figure 9: Organogram of Education Department Gilgit-Baltistan ........................................................ 72

Figure 10: Communication and Coordination in Punjab ....................................................................... 79

Figure 11: Allied institutions of SED Punjab .......................................................................................... 80

Figure 12: Single factor priority analysis ............................................................................................... 87

Figure 13: Multiple factor priority analysis ........................................................................................... 87

Figure 14: Communication and Coordination in Sindh ......................................................................... 92

Figure 15: Organogram of SELD ............................................................................................................ 94

Figure 16: Allied Institutions of SELD .................................................................................................... 94

Figure 17: Ideal relationship among organizations ............................................................................. 103

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

vii

Acronyms

ABPPSA All Balochistan Progressive Private Schools Association

AEO Assistant Education Officer

AEPAM Academy of Education Planning & Management

AIP Annual Implementation Plan

AJK Azad Jammu & Kashmir

AJKPSA AJK Private School Association

AJKTBB AJK Textbook Board

AKES Agha Khan Education Services

AKU Aga Khan University

APPSF All Pakistan Private School Foundation

ASDEO Assistant Sub Divisional Education Officer

ASI Adam Smith International

B.Ed. Bachelor of Education

BEAC Balochistan Education Assessment Commission

BECS Basic Education Community Schools

BEF Balochistan Education Foundation

BESP Balochistan Education Sector Plan

BISE Board of intermediate and Secondary Education

BOC Bureau of Curriculum

BTBB Balochistan Textbook Board

C&W Construction and Works

CAD Capital Administration and Development

CDRC Curriculum Development Research Center GB

CDWP Central Development Working Party

CIF Curriculum Implementation Framework

CNIC Computerized National Identity Card

CPD Continuous Professional Development

CPM Chief Program Manager

CSP Civil Services of Pakistan

CSP Community Support Process

DCAR Directorate of Curriculum Assessment and Research

DCMA Data Collection and Monitoring Assistant

DCRD Directorate of Curriculum Research and Development AJK

DCTE Directorate of Curriculum and Teacher Education Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

viii

DD Deputy Director

DDU District Delivery Unit Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

DDWP Departmental Development Working Party

DEO District Education Officer

DFID Department for International Development UK

DG Director General

DL&NFE Directorate of Literacy & Non-Formal Education

DMO District Monitoring Officer

DOE Department of Education

DPIESE Directorate of Public Instructions Elementary and Secondary Education, AJK

DSD Department of Staff Development

E&SED Elementary & Secondary Education Department Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

ECD Early Childhood Development

ECE Early Childhood Education

ED Executive Director

EDO Executive District Officer Education

EFA Education for All

EMIS Education Management Information System

FATA Federal Administered Tribal Areas

FBISE Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education

FDE Federal Directorate of Education Islamabad

FGD Focused Group Discussion

FTI Fast Track Initiative

GB Gilgit Baltistan

GB ES Gilgit Baltistan Education Strategy

GBECC Gilgit Baltistan Education Coordination Council

GBLA Gilgit Baltistan Legislative Assembly

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GIZ Gesellschaft fürInternationaleZusammenarbeit-German Technical Cooperation

HRMS Human Resource Management System

HT Primary Head Teacher Primary School

HT Secondary Head Teacher Secondary School

IBCC Inter Board Committee of Chairmen

ICT Islamabad Capital Territory/ Information and Communication Technology

IMU Independent Monitoring Unit Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

ix

INGO International Non-Governmental Organization

IPEMC Inter Provincial Education Minister's Conference

IPWG Inter Provincial Working Group

ITE Initial Teacher Education

JEA Joint Education Advisor

JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency

JICA Japan international cooperation agency

KEAS Kashmir Education Assessment System

KESP Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Sector Programme (funded by DFID)

KPITB Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Information Technology Board

KPPSRA Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Private Schools Regulatory Authority

KPTBB Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Textbook Board

LEG Local Education Group Balochistan

LND Literacy Numeracy Drive

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MER Monitoring Evaluation and Research

MoFEPT Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training

MoPD&R Ministry of Planning Development and Reform

MSQE Minimum Standards for Quality Education

NCC National Curriculum Council

NCF National Curriculum Framework

NCHD National Commission for Human Development

NEAS National Education Assessment System

NEF National Education Foundation

NEMIS National Education Management Information System

NEP National Education Policy

NFBE Non Formal Basic Education

NFE Non Formal Education

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NSB Non Salary Budget

NTI National Training Institute

NTS National Testing Service

PCTB Punjab Curriculum and Textbook Board

PDB Planning and Development Board Punjab

PDCN Professional Development Center North

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

x

PEAS Punjab Education Assessment Commission

PEC Punjab Examination Commission

PEELI Punjab Education and English Language Initiatives

PEIRA Private Educational Institutions Regulatory Authority

PESDA Punjab Education Standards Development Authority

PESP Punjab Education Sector Program

PESRP Punjab Education Sector Reform Programme

PITE Provincial Institute for Teacher Education

PMES Project Monitoring and Education System

PMIU Programme Monitoring and Implementation Unit Punjab

PPIU Policy Planning and Implementation Unit Balochistan

PPIU Policy Planning and Implementation Unit

PSDP Public Sector Development Programme

PSTE Punjab Strategy for Teachers Education

PTBB Punjab Textbook Board

PTC Parent Teacher Council Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

PVT Private (referred for private schools association)

QA Quality Assurance

QAED Quaid-e-Azam Academy for Educational Development

RITE Regional Institute for Teachers Education

RSDU Regional School Development Unit GB

RSU Reform Support Unit Sindh

RTSMS Real Time School Monitoring System Balochistan

SCDP Sindh Capacity Development Project

SCR Student Classroom Ratio

SDG Sustainable Development Goals

SED Secondary Education Department Balochistan

SELD Sindh Education and Literacy Department

SEMIS Sindh Education Management Information System

SERP Sindh Education Reform Programme

SESLOF Sindh Education Students Learning Outcomes Framework

SESP Sindh Education Sector Plan

SIP School Improvement Plan

SLO Student Learning Outcome

SMC School Management Committee

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

xi

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

SQMI School Quality Management Initiative

STBB Sindh Textbook Board

STEDA Sindh Teacher Education Development Authority

STR Student Teacher Ratio

SWD Social Welfare Department

TA Technical Assistance

TLM Teaching Learning Material

TOR Terms of Reference

TWG Technical Working Group

UIS UNESCO Institute of Statistics

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNESCO United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNICEF United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund

USAID United States Agency for International Development

Symbols

% The symbol refers to percent.

0 Zero means that the amount is nil or negligible.

– The symbol signifies that the data is not available or is not separately reported.

Notes

i. The terms 'budget estimates' and 'allocations' are used interchangeably.

ii. The terms 'utilization', 'spending' and 'expenditure' are used interchangeably.

iii. The terms ‘current budget’ and ‘recurrent budget’ are used interchangeably.

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Education is a fundamental human right enshrined under the UN Declaration of Human Rights as well as Article 25-A of the Constitution of Pakistan. Article 25-A binds the Government of Pakistan “to provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age five to sixteen years in such manner as may be determined by law”1. The international covenants like Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agreed by the United Nations member states on September 25, 2015 goes a step further by including quality aspect in education. The SDG-4 dealing exclusively with education also binds the signatory countries to “ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education for all by 2030 and promote lifelong learning”. Therefore, making education accessible and delivery of quality education are key responsibilities of the state.

The challenges faced by Pakistan on the education front are enormous. Years of lack of attention to the education sector in the form of inadequate financing, poor governance as well as lack of capacity, has translated into insufficient number of schools, low enrolment, poor facilities in schools, high dropout rate, shortage and incompetent teachers, etc. Pakistan is faced with the challenge of 39 million out of school children in the age group of 5 to 16 years and around 2million children are estimated to be added every year. As a developing country with 6th largest population in the world and 60% of its population comprising youth, Pakistan critically requires a widely accessible quality and equitable education system2.

Pakistan is currently spending around 2.2 percent of its GDP on education against the required minimum target of 4 percent, although the National Education Policy 2009 recommended 7% of GDP to be spent on education. After several years of devolution post-18th amendment, provincial governments are still struggling to make any notable progress in education sector. One of the main reasons for the slow progress in improving the state of education in Pakistan has been the disconnect between its educational policies, data and budgetary allocations. As long as these three pillars of educational change remain disconnected, a successful and sustainable educational development will not be possible.3

The dismal situation is also retracting Pakistan’s progress in meeting international commitments towards equitable and quality education. The country’s sedate progress towards achieving the SDG-4 targets by 2030 warrants some urgent course correction measures and identifying key bottlenecks. The research study titled “Consultancy to Explore Structural Bottlenecks for Inculcating/Mainstreaming Quality in the Existing Public/Private Education System in Pakistan” commissioned jointly by the Ministry of Planning Development & Reform and UNDP is a step towards this direction.

The objective of this study is to explore broad contours of “quality education” by analyzing the structural bottlenecks in the overall organization of education service delivery functions.

1https://pakistanconstitutionlaw.com/article-25a-right-to-education/ 2Report of the Committee on Education Sector Reforms in Pakistan, Federal Ombudsman’s Secretariat, Islamabad

3Public Financing of Education in Pakistan 2010-11 to 2016-17, Institute of Social and Policy Sciences

https://pakistanconstitutionlaw.com/article-25a-right-to-education/

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0


The research study will also examine the implementation of Minimum Standards for Quality Education under the federal, provincial and area level education systems/ departments.

Within the context of quality education assessment, semi-structured questionnaires were developed and used to collect qualitative information from various stakeholders. The questionnaires, covered:

• Respondents department/ section/ organization’s mandate

• Familiarity or knowledge of respondents about MSQE

• Parameters of quality which fell under their mandate

• The extent to which the MSQE or related quality standards were mainstreamed in their respective department/ section/ organization

• Probing factors which are responsible for low performance w.r.t. teachers, physical facilities and school environment

• Implementation of MSQE or related quality education standards in the province/ area

• Bottlenecks in the identification of standards w.r.t. plans, finances, coordination, communication and processes

• Impact of education departments internal systems on implementation of quality standards

• Budgetary expenditure on education from 2013-2017 with details of sub heads where possible

The Consultant engaged for this assignment carried out significant review of literature to understand quality education dynamics in Pakistan. For this particular assignment, a sample of82 education department officials, education managers, head teachers, international organizations education staff from ICT, Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Azad Jammu & Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan were interviewed and their technical expertise and knowledge about MSQE and quality education was documented. In addition, three focused group discussions (FGDs) were carried out with teachers, one in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and two in Gilgit Baltistan covering 22 teachers (13 male and 9 female). To incorporate the feedbacks of learners, five FGDs were conducted, one in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and four in Gilgit Baltistan. These five FGDs covered 50 learners (30 boys and 20 girls from grade 5, 8 and 10). Thus, the report draws on the feedback from total 154 participants.

The results of the research study have been compiled as per themes and sub-themes derived from the scope of work of the consultancy. The key findings have been arranged province wise so that comparisons can be drawn against achievements and bottlenecks for implementing Minimum Standards for Quality Education in Pakistan (MSQE) approved by the Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training in 2016.

As part of the consultancy assignment, the major bottlenecks identified in the plans, finances, communication, administration, coordination and processes of federal and provincial/ area education departments are as follows:

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0


• Most of the respondents (public and private education sector) had little knowledge about MSQE and quality standards therein. The MSQE document disseminated by MOFEPT did not trickle down to the lower level. There has been no follow-up by MOFEPT after dissemination of MSQE due to which laxity was observed among provinces

• Provinces have not made any progress on drafting implementation priorities, plans, procedures and monitoring mechanisms for implementation of MSQE as suggested by the MSQE framework.

• Weak inter departmental coordination at provincial/ area level between education departments/ allied institutions was observed.

• High turnover in the education department/ allied institutions. The frequent transfers and appointment of non-technical people on key decision-making positions affected the pace of education reforms and implementation of quality standards. Moreover, the institutional memory was also found lacking in most cases.

• Shortage of teachers (KP and Punjab in particular) is an impediment in providing quality education at school level.

• The education system still has thousands of unqualified and incapable teachers, mostly recruited on political basis. Over the years, curriculum has been revised drastically, textbooks and SLO’s have become difficult and activity-based learning is being promoted. Such teachers are finding it hard to cope with the changes and this is affecting the quality of education imparted.

• Frequent and abrupt changes in education policies create problems rather than improving outcomes. For example, the government policy of automatic promotion in government primary schools practiced to improve the drop out indicators at national level has led to demotivation among teachers and has been one of the causes of low performance. The teachers have stopped to take assessments or terminal exams or putting in extra effort for improving students’ performance, knowing well that even without their effort, the student will still be promoted to the next class

• Almost all provincial governments are spending huge amounts on providing basic facilities missing in schools like electricity, drinking water, toilets, boundary wall, but there are still many schools not having these facilities. Expecting quality education without these basic facilities is impracticable.

• The textbook authors while developing textbooks are oblivious about the level of understanding of students. The language and vocabulary used in text books is difficult to comprehend by the students and equally challenging for teachers. Many critical mistakes are revealed in textbooks after printing.

• Most of inter departmental communication in government education department offices is carried out according to the official correspondence protocols, even if something has to be communicated to a person/office in the same premises or nearby building. For communication, offices are still relying on postal correspondence which is cumbersome and time consuming.

• Overcrowded classrooms are a disincentive to learning, and make it difficult or impossible for teachers to practice active, student-centred learning

• The indicators that are being monitored by M&E or EMIS sections are less in number, whereas using the same system, many more indicators relating to school performance and quality can be included, monitored and improved. The system has to be used to its optimum capacity.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0


To overcome these bottlenecks and put the country on road to achieving quality education, the following recommendations are proposed, albeit some directlyrelated to MSQE implementation:

Actions/ Measures for Achieving Quality Education

• The budgetary allocation to education sector has remained static around 2 % of GDP for the past decade, with a big chunk (about 92%) being spent on recurrent heads mainly salaries, leaving a small amount (about 8%) as development budget for quality enhancement such as provision of school facilities, teachers’ training, curriculum development, monitoring and supervision of education.

• Substantial increase in education sector budget is required: from present 2.2% of GDP to 4% of GDP at national level and minimum allocation of 25% total budget of provinces/areas to reach the target in four years. This would entail capacity building at the provincial and district level so that funds can be properly utilized and are not lapsed or allocated to other sectors.

• This is also an important opportunity to address the challenge of budgeting, particularly in the areas which do not receive National Finance Commission awards like GB and AJK. The seventh NFC award has allotted 82.98% of financial grants to four provinces. Under the new formula, approximately 51.74% of revenue shares were directed to Punjab; 24.55% to Sindh; 14.62% to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa; and 9.09% to Balochistan Province; all shares were distributed based upon their performances.

• The 60% single teacher schools in the country may not be able to meet even the basic teaching and learning standards, as long as the number of teachers is not rationalized. The student-teacher ratio must be brought down through accelerated induction through NTS and training for improved learning outcomes.

• More teachers would reduce the pupil-teacher ratio (PTR) and pupils will have a better chance of contact with the teachers and hence a better teaching‐learning process. Currently, the average national PTR for pre-primary level is 19, primary is 32, middle is 21 and upper secondary is 23. It needs to be brought down significantly to around 15 .

• Federal and Provincial Ministries of Education in collaboration with Directorate of Trainings should make teacher guides and other open educational resources available on-line for teachers through a portal like https://elearn.gov.pk/

• Multi grade teaching is a reality, especially in rural area schools. There is hardly any arrangement for training of teachers in this mode. Directorate of Teacher Education in Federal, Provincial and Areas should develop modules on multi-grade teaching for teachers involved in multi-grade teaching.

• Teachers need to be trained and equipped with latest teaching techniques on regular basis. It needs to be ensured that teachers go and work in remote areas for teaching duty. Incentive to teachers be provided in the shape of promotions related to their performance.

• Monitoring and evaluation is led by the Academy of Educational Planning & Management and integrated with provincial/ area networks extending to district levels. While substantial data is collected through education management information systems and other means, there is a need to finetune indicators, coordinate with other bodies, and draw on household surveys.

• The M&E and EMIS staff needs refresher trainings. M&E, EMIS and general monitoring / follow up tools (questionnaires) must be reviewed immediately and aligned with MSQE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khyber_Pakhtunkhwa

https://elearn.gov.pk/

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0


For example, indicators relating to teachers monitoring/ follow up inside the class must be derived from teachers’ standards. Similarly, indicators of school facilities must be aligned with standards for school learning environment. The M&E and EMIS section should also collect data on private schools on the same parameters. Feedback system to collect data, review and analyze the data coming through these tools and then reporting must be on regular basis. Sharing of reports with concerned individuals/ offices should also be a regular feature followed by a final monitoring that would denote an analysis of actions taken on the basis of data.

• The provincial/ area governments are spending huge amounts every year on provision of missing facilities in government schools. But still many schools are left out due to funding constraints. The CSR activities of big corporate companies, private entrepreneur firms and individuals should be encouraged and given incentives to adopt schools for infrastructure development and provision of necessary facilities. The incentives could be in the shape of tax rebates or attribution of schools to the sponsors. Public-private partnership for running government schools should also be explored.

• New formal schools need to be constructed on urgent basis to improve access, particularly for girls. However, for optimum utilization of available infrastructure, double shifts should also be introduced in all schools where sufficient number of students are available. Additional teachers and staff should be recruited with corresponding budget allocation.

• Out of school children need to be enrolled through Intensified enrollment campaigns by involving parents, community elders, prayer leaders etc. National Commission for Human Development (NCHD) and Basic Education Community School (BECS) needs to be involved for promoting literacy and enrolling out of school children.

• School Education Departments through head teachers and teachers should increase contact with parents and make them realize the value of education in improving the lives of their children. Schools should initiate campaigns to familiarize parents regarding: children's learning needs and parents' role in supporting them, nutritional and hygiene needs of their children, giving attention to their children at home to complete their class assignment and visiting regularly their school. School Management Committees should be revitalized and civil society members be involved apart from school administration & parents.

• Education departments at Federal and Provincial level should work on grades, pay scales and career paths for teachers to retain these highly qualified teachers in schools.

• Although all induction in education department in most provinces is now being carried out through NTS test, a system like teacher certification and licensing as proposed in Punjab, that rewards excellent practice, innovation, attracts high achievers to the profession and sustains motivated teachers, needs to be developed and implemented in all provinces/ areas.

• School Education Department may arrange financial support program for poor students to improve student retention, especially girls' retention in schools.

• School Education Departments in provinces and areas should introduce a separate cadre of head teachers with separate recruitment criteria, service structure and career path to provide visionary leadership for school improvement in primary schools, permanent designation of head teachers can improve leadership in primary schools.

• In order to prepare the students for gainful employment opportunities, the Government should introduce skill-based education having avenues for profitable employment in

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0


coordination with TEVTA and NAVTEC. The schools should be upgraded accordingly with the facilities for such education and training.

• The government communication system needs to be eased out through ICT/ emails and mobile applications for quick sharing of information and decision making.

• The assessment & examination related organizations (which vary in each province/area)

should carry out assessment for grade 5 and 8 and develop analytical reports that should

depict geographical and subject wise assessment reports to inform policy, curricula,

textbooks, and training & education programs in the province.

• At the same time organizations responsible for curricula, textbooks, in-service training

and pre-service education must use the assessment findings and improve these areas.

This can only happen through objective coordination among these organizations to

enhance the quality of education in the provinces. This may be initiated by setting

standards for teachers, learning environment, learners, textbooks and curricula followed

by a comprehensive standards management system, which would allow to set up an

operational feedback system.

Actions/ Measures for Promoting and Implementing MSQEE

▪ MSQE needs to be further promoted among the provinces/ areas and disseminated horizontally and vertically through a vigorous campaign led by MOFEPT.

▪ The campaign may require printing and distribution of additional copies of MSQE and carrying out orientation sessions for key government education department/ institution staff and private school representatives in each province/ area.

▪ The provincial/ area SDG Support Units can play a role through close liaison with the respective education departments and allied institutions within their province/ area to facilitate the distribution of copies and orientation sessions since these have a direct impact on achieving the SDG-4 targets.

▪ The participants of orientation sessions should be sensitized about the importance of quality education and need for adoption of quality standards to achieve SDG-4 targets.

▪ All provincial/ area education departments should keep a record of copies received/ sent along with copy of notification with each booklet and establish a system of acknowledgement from the receiving entity.

▪ All provincial/area education departments and their allied institutions should be instructed by MOFEPT and through Secretary Education to put the soft copy of MSQE on the main pages of their official websites or facebook pages for easy reference.

▪ The soft copies of the MSQE document should also be shared in various social media forums/ networks like WhatsApp, Twitter used by department staff/allied institutions/ teachers. This would ensure easy access to the standards.

▪ The MSQE booklet needs to be translated into Urdu and disseminated widely. The language used in the document is difficult to understand for most teachers and education staff at provincial level.

▪ Colored panaflex posters on quality standards in Urdu should be printed by respective government education department/ institutions and provided to middle, high and higher secondary schools for pasting at prominent places in government schools to increase awareness about these standards among students, teachers and PTC members.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0


• A series of consultative workshops are needed at federal and provincial/ area level to devise an implementation framework for each province/ area as per their priorities and context. The Technical Working Group (TWG) needs to be made functional.

• The framework with clearly defined indicators should translate into an Action Plan with yearly targets, activities and means of verification.

• The provincial and federal level private schools’ regulatory authorities/ private school federations should be involved in the entire process.

• The implementation framework must include commitments from the provincial/ area government for establishing a dedicated Quality Standards Unit in their respective province/ area with required technical staff and financial resources for implementation of the framework and monitoring its progress.

• Although after the 18th amendment, implementation of quality education is the domain of provincial government but MOFEPT must continue to play the anchor role in steering provinces towards quality education.

• The MOFEPT needs to take a lead on formation/restructuring of TWG in each province and empowering it to develop an action plan for implementation of MSQE.

• It should be made mandatory for TWG to meet in every quarter and share the minutes with MOFEPT as well as IPEMC.

• Exchange meetings between TWGs should be encouraged for experience sharing and lessons learnt.

• A robust monitoring mechanism needs to be developed at the federal level to coordinate with the provincial/ area Quality Standards Units for monitoring the action plans on quarterly basis.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 General Background

Education is essential for a developed and progressive society as it empowers and creates ability among the individuals and the societies to utilize their productive capabilities. It boosts socio-economic development, reduces poverty and inequalities in the society thus contributes to democracy, harmony, tolerance, peace and stability4.The progress towards achievement of compulsory and quality education is slow. Pakistan faces severe challenges with regards to achieving SDG-4. Over 22.6 million children aged 5–16 years are out of school and the adult literacy rate stands at 57 per cent. There are severe inequities in access and quality, with substantial disparities by gender, socioeconomic status and location, and the supply, training and qualifications of teachers are inadequate. School environments are poor, and early childhood education (ECE) is not uniformly available. The quality and provision of technical and vocational education and training (TVET) is uneven. In addition, education is hampered by budgetary constraints, weak governance, poverty, insecurity and frequent natural disasters.5 Absence of clearly defined and agreed upon minimum national standards for quality education at national level in the past left the education system without a basic framework for setting targets and for evaluating attempts at improvements in education quality. To fill this void, work on development of Minimum Standards for Quality Education (MSQE) was started in February 2013 in consultation with the provincial stakeholders. In February 2016, these standards were finalized and approved by the Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training, Islamabad for implementation across Pakistan. Devolution of the education functions to the provincial/area level after the 18th Amendment 2010 has placed the imperative of ensuring the quality of education on the provincial and area governments. Although adaptation and implementation of MSQE at the national and provincial level might pose some challenges but it also offers an opportunity to the federal, provincial and area governments to ensure uniformity in the access to quality education and meet international commitments like Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG-4). To further support Government of Pakistan’s efforts in achieving the national education targets set under SDG-4, UNDP Pakistan in coordination with MoPD&R (SDG Section) has commissioned a research study aimed at exploring structural bottlenecks in implementing and mainstreaming minimum standards for quality education in Pakistan at the federal, provincial and area/regional level.

The research study report is expected to serve as a guiding document for the education departments under federal and provincial governments to comprehend and address the implementation bottlenecks on course of achieving the quality education targets under SDG-4.

4Report of the Committee on Education Sector Reforms in Pakistan, Federal Ombudsman’s Secretariat, Islamabad 5UNESCO (2017), Sustainable Development Goal 4- Gap Analysis

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0


1.2 What is Quality Education?

The Dakar Framework for Action in 2000 declared that access to quality education was the right of every child. Quality in education entailed desirable characteristics of learners (healthy, motivated students), processes (competent teachers using active pedagogies), content (relevant curricula) and systems (good governance and equitable resource allocation). 6

According to UNICEF7, quality education includes:

• Learners who are healthy, well-nourished and ready to participate and learn, and supported in learning by their families and communities;

• Environments that are healthy, safe, protective and gender-sensitive, and provide adequate resources and facilities;

• Content that is reflected in relevant curricula and materials for the acquisition of basic skills, especially in the areas of literacy, numeracy and skills for life, and knowledge in such areas as gender, health, nutrition, HIV/AIDS prevention and peace;

• Processes through which trained teachers use child-centered teaching approaches in well-managed classrooms and schools and skillful assessment to facilitate learning and reduce disparities;

• Outcomes that encompass knowledge, skills and attitudes, and are linked to national goals for education and positive participation in society.

1.3 Education after the 18th Amendment

In 2008, a political consensus on re-allocating several federal-level functions to the provinces emerged. Encapsulated in the 18thAmendment to the Constitution, this consensus resulted in the abolition of the Concurrent List – which delineated subjects on which both the federal and provincial governments could legislate. Seventeen federal ministries were devolved in three phases between December2010 and June 2011. The functions of these ministries were either assigned to various provincial governments or reallocated within the federal government. The third and final phase of devolution was undertaken on 29thJune 2011when seven ministries were abolished effective from 1stJuly 2011. 8

While devolution and the abolition of the Concurrent Legislative List resulted in the transfer of federal ministries and their mandates to provincial governments; capacity constraints inhuman resource, financial resource and infrastructure resource hampered the effective take-up of devolved functions at the provincial level.

6UNESCO (2015), Understanding Education Quality

7UNICEF (June 2000), Defining Quality in Education

8Devolution: Provincial Autonomy and the 18 Amendment, 2014, Jinnah Institute: page. 06 http://www.jinnah-institute.org/

http://www.jinnah-institute.org/

http://www.jinnah-institute.org/

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 10

After devolution, the MOFEPT retains some limited mandates, mainly in curriculum development, accreditation and the financing of research and development.9The Academy of Educational Planning and Management (AEPAM) is being administratively controlled by MOFEPT and performing the functions of collation of education data collected through Provincial/Regional EMISs (Education Management Information System) and maintains linkages with Provincial and District Organization and Education Institutions10.

1.4 Minimum National Standards for Quality Education

The first dedicated effort towards a standards-based education system in Pakistan was made in 1976 with the promulgation of the ‘Federal Supervision of Curricula and Maintenance of Education Standards’ Act. Under this Act, the Ministry of Education had assumed a supervisory role in the development of a national curriculum. However, a structured consultative process to formulate minimum quality standards was overlooked at that point. The National Education Policy (2009) came as the first national level document in recent education history which clearly articulated the need for a standards-based education system and recommends that, “the quality of education provided in government-owned institutions must be raised through setting standards for educational inputs, processes and outputs and institutionalizing the process of monitoring and evaluation from the lowest to the highest levels”.11

The Minimum Standards for Quality Education (MSQE)12have been developed by the Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training through a highly participatory interprovincial process and formally adopted in the 7th Inter Provincial Education Minister's Conference (IPEMC) held in Islamabad in February, 2016. The MSQE includes (i) Standards for Learners (ii) Standards for Teachers (iii) Standards for Curriculum and Textbooks (iv) Standards for Assessment (v) Standards for School Environment. The framework and guidelines for implementation of MSQE (included in the MSQE document) emphasizes on development and implementation of strategic roadmaps and detailed action plans at the provincial/area level by the respective Technical Working Groups (TWGs).

1.5 TORs of the Consultancy

The overall objective of the consultancy is to explore broad contours of “quality education” by analyzing the structural bottlenecks in the overall organization of education service delivery functions. The research study will examine the implementation of Minimum Standards for Quality Education under the federal, provincial and area level education systems/ departments. Explore and analyze the existing mechanisms/systems for implementation of Minimum Standards for Quality Education, highlight progress on adaptation/ implementation of standards, identify structural gaps/ bottlenecks in implementation, explore and analyze education budget allocation, utilization and associated gaps with reference to the standards, and provide recommendations for improving implementation of education quality standards. The study is also meant to explore factors that act as barriers to provision and delivery of quality education services especially at

9https://www.globalpartnership.org/country/pakistan 10Report of the Committee on Education Sector Reforms in Pakistan, 2018 11 National Education Policy 2009: page. 39 12 MSQE 2016

https://www.globalpartnership.org/country/pakistan

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 11

school level by analyzing the services delivery channels, the extent to which quality parameters and minimum quality standards are adhered to in such service provision. The specific TORs of the consultancy are as follows:

1) Review and analysis of the extent to which the “Minimum Standards for Quality Education” have been defined/ formulated at primary and secondary level in both public and private schools with particular reference to the:

a. Learning environment b. Content c. Processes d. Outcomes e. Learners

2) In-depth study of factors causing low performance in public and private primary schools related to three elements of quality i.e.

a. Teachers b. Physical facilities c. Learning environment

3) Review and analysis of the mechanism adopted by the provincial, federal and area governments for implementing “Minimum Standards for Quality Education in Pakistan” at the primary and secondary level in both public and private stream of education.

4) Identify bottlenecks in the implementation of “Minimum Standards for Quality Education” at federal, provincial and district level at primary and secondary level.

5) Explore the impact (good/ bad) of coordination, communication and decision-making mechanisms on implementation of quality education at federal and provincial level.

6) Analyze the role of education department’s internal systems such as performance, human resource, and information management on implementation mechanism of quality education.

7) Analyze the monitoring mechanism (strengths and weaknesses) of federal/provinces/area to track progress of quality education standards implementation in both public and private schools.

8) Analyze federal and provincial budget expenditure on education from 2013 to 2017 with a break up share on implementation of quality education areas. Make recommendation measures for effective budget utilization for ensuring quality.

9) Identify the bottlenecks in plans, finances, communication, administration, coordination and processes at federal and provincial level and suggest measures to achieve the required quality standards.

The outputs of the consultancy are as follows:

Output 1: Inception report having detailed data collection plan.

Output 2: First draft of research report and recommendations to be submitted to the technical team

Output 3: Final report after incorporating feedback of technical team with recommendation and corrective measures, presentation and action framework and all raw data (hard and soft with the analysis tools used and the results).

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 12

Output 4: Participate in policy dialogue with UNDP, MoPD&R and other stakeholders to share findings with federal and provincial governments

1.6 Structure of the Report

Chapter one provides information on the general background, objectives and expected outputs of the consultancy, Chapter two covers the literature review highlighting the link between policy environment and quality education and key gaps in implementation, Chapter three gives an overview of the methodological approaches that were applied to collect and analyze all relevant information and data. Moreover, the chapter also includes a section where the key stakeholders interviewed at federal, provincial and area level are listed. Furthermore, major methodological challenges that the consultants faced during their work are also included. Chapter four presents the major findings and results/bottlenecks. Building on that, Chapter five presents the recommendations for addressing the bottlenecks.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 13

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE/ MATERIAL

The education system in Pakistan is faced with myriad challenges, which have been addressed in the education policies and plans formulated and implemented in the last few decades. The literature review section aims to examine these policies and plans in terms of elements of quality education and identifying key gaps in achieving quality education.

2.1 The Road to Quality Education

Quality education has been the common goal reflected in all national education policies and provincial/ area education sector plans (ESPs). All provincial and area ESPs take as their primary focuses, access, quality and governance, with varying emphases within these. Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan ESPs are generally well-aligned with SDG-4, including strategies related to areas such as access, quality and governance. GB, FATA and ICT ESPs show a fair degree of alignment (UNESCO, 2017).

The NEP (2009) clearly articulates the need for a standards-based education system and recommends that, “the quality of education provided in government-owned institutions must be raised through setting standards for educational inputs, processes and outputs and institutionalizing the process of monitoring and evaluation from the lowest to the highest levels”13.

In the NEP (2009) Quality Assurance in Education has been given high consideration allocating separate chapter on quality and its constituents in education sector. The policy highlights six basic pillars that have the major contribution. These are curriculum, textbooks, assessments, teachers, the learning environment in an institution and relevance of education to practical life/ labour market. The most significant action is required in improving teaching resources and pedagogical approaches that teachers employ. The reform of teaching quality is of the highest priority14 (Ahmed& Hussain, 2014).

According to (Ahmed& Hussain, 2014) Early Childhood Education (ECE) has been addressed in NEP 2009. Historically, however, ECE has not been formally recognized by the public sector in Pakistan. The policy denotes that ECE age group shall be recognized as comprising 3 to 5 years. At least one-year pre-primary education shall be provided by the State and universal access to ECE shall be ensured within the next ten years.

The NEP 2009 also includes a target for the Government to increase educational spending to seven percent of the GDP by the year 2015.Additionally, the policy sets itself a few notable milestones-i.e., provision of free primary education by 2015, provision of free education up to matric by 2025, increase in adult literacy rates to 86 percent by 2015, increase in higher education enrolment from 4.7 percent to 10 percent in 2015 and 15 percent in 2020 (Ejaz, 2009).

The NEP (2009) also states that “National Standards for educational inputs, processes and outputs shall be determined. National Authority for Standards of Education shall be established. The standards shall not debar a provincial and area government/organization

13 National Education Policy 2009: page. 39 14Ahmed, Imtiaz & Athar Hussain, Muhammad. (2014). National Education Policy (NEP-2009-2015) in Pakistan: Critical analysis and a way forward. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities. 53-II. 53-60.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 14

from having its own standards higher than the minimum prescribed standards.” Further, the Provincial Governments and district authorities shall establish monitoring and inspection systems to ensure quality education and service delivery in all institutions. The policy also emphasizes on providing education which enhances employability and innovation in the economy.

The NEP (2017) (Draft) also emphasizes on provision of quality education by introducing reforms of new initiatives in curriculum formulation, textbook and instructional materials development, teacher training, examination and assessment and monitoring and supervision. It envisions recruitment of competent, capable and committed scholar-teachers, development and implementation of National Curriculum Framework and National Standards foreach subject from Grade 1-12. NEP (2017) (Draft) also envisages increasing investment in education to 4% of GDP.

The National Educational Policy Framework 2018 launched by the Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training in November 2018 focuses on four key areas i.e. enrolment of 25 million out of school children, provision of quality education, skill development, and uniform syllabus.15 As a first step, the Ministry would bring 27,000 out of school children in Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) into formal and non-formal educational institutions in next two years with the public-private partnership. The policy also aims to end the three parallel systems i.e. public schooling, madrassah schooling and English-medium or private schooling. The new policy also emphasizes on providing market-oriented education so that students can find jobs easily. To overcome the shortfall of middle schools in the country, middle-school classes will be held in primary schools after the school timings. To tackle the growing need for teachers, Smart Schools System will be launched under which online lectures will be delivered in schools facing a lack of teaching staff. Educational Volunteer Programme would also be initiated to fulfill the need of teachers; under this programme the educated youth would extend their services voluntarily to teach the children in schools of their areas. National Curriculum Council will be established in which educational experts will be included to develop a consensus for uniform syllabus.

The KPK Education Sector Plan 2010-201516 has a dedicated chapter on improving quality. It acknowledges the fact that the quality of education provided in the public-school system is not up to the mark, with little focus on actual learning achievements of children or assessment of the core competencies of teachers. The poor quality of the teaching and learning achievement, especially in the early classes of primary school, is one of the main reasons for the high dropout in primary schools.

In the Balochistan Education Sector Plan 2013-18, strategies for quality improvement have been built around the inputs, processes and outputs of the various quality related factors. These include teachers, curriculum, textbooks, examinations, school environment and school language policy. It further states that Annual Implementation Plans (AIP) will be developed at the district level as well as individual organizations like the Balochistan Textbook Board, the Bureau of Curriculum, BISE, Directorate of Education and Directorate of Higher Education. PPIU will collate the plan at the provincial level, which will be used for monitoring by the technical and high-level committees.

15 The News https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/415623-ministry-initiates-several-projects-for-uplift-of-education-sector 16KP Education Sector Plan 2010-2015, pp. 44-58

https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/415623-ministry-initiates-several-projects-for-uplift-of-education-sector

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 15

According to UNESCO (2017), the Balochistan ESP (2013–2018) places a high value on governance and management, as part of its strategic move towards decentralization in a province with small settlements scattered over a vast area. This geography informs many of its access related strategies, such as upgrading existing schools to offer higher levels of education, and community-based schooling models. Quality and management are also priority areas.

The Punjab School Education Sector Plan 2013-17 envisages that standards need to be developed and notified for all education inputs, processes and outputs with SLOs as the main indicator for quality. Standards for school infrastructure need to be reviewed keeping local environment and learning needs in mind.

The GB Education Strategy (2015–2030) is a long-term strategy to guide education. It states that minimum standards for educational institutions will be developed. Subsequently, schools will be constructed, rehabilitated and/or upgraded (in terms of additional classes and teachers) according to standards of physical quality, including resistance to seismic activity, and teaching–learning resources to be defined by government, incorporating indigenous designs which protect the local environment and making use of expertise within local communities.

The Sindh Education Sector Plan 2014-2018 focuses on quality aspects. The most notable programmes proposed under the SESP are as follows: (i) an initiative to progressively transform daycare-style Katchi classes into dynamic, child-centred ECE classes promoting school readiness and equity; (ii) the introduction of ‘double shifting’ across districts to increase enrolment capacity; (iii) school consolidation, i.e. reduce the number of small schools; (iv) an induction plan for new teachers and CPD for all teachers focused on learning outcomes in general and reading in particular; (v) the creation of a new management cadre to enhance governance; (vi) re-grouping of middle schools with primary schools and higher secondary classes with secondary classes to achieve cost savings and improve transition rates and equity; (vii) re-designing literacy and non-formal basic education to be taken to scale through reduced reliance on traditional classroom contexts and greater use of mass media and social media opportunities; (viii) design and implementation of an Human Resources Management System (HRMS); (ix) improved monitoring system through hiring of monitors; and (x) establishment of an effective Information and Communications Technology (ICT) system.

AJK has drafted an ESP (2016–2021) but it is yet to be finalized or approved. However, this also offers an opportunity to align the ESP with Education 2030 well before the plan’s original expiry date in 2021. The draft ESP as it stands is almost entirely focused on access to education. For most quality-related factors national-level policies and strategies are used, with no systematic localization. This is indicative of a need to advocate for increased political ownership of education in AJK (UNESCO, 2017).

The standards for learners, teachers, curriculum and textbooks, assessment and school environment, specified in the document “Minimum Standards for Quality Education in Pakistan (MSQE)”17aims to ensure uniformity in the standards for provision of access to quality education.

17Minimum Standards for Quality Education in Pakistan 2016

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 16

2.2 Gaps in Policies and Plans to Impart Quality Education

According to Ahmad, Rauf, Imdadullah& Zeb (2012),18lack of continuity in successive government policies, corruption, inadequate financial allocations, lack of training for human resource, lack of visionary leadership, lack of political will on the part of successive governments, poor follow ups, poor monitoring system, poor policy evaluations, centralized approach in implementation, lack of political stability and decaying institutional disciplines are the main causes that have plagued the process of educational policy implementation in Pakistan. It further reiterates that policy goals in Pakistani education are sublime and ideal, yet, due to the above identified reasons coupled by weak institutional structures and frequent political interventions, the policies remain unfulfilled and do not achieve the desired results. The NEP 2009recognizes two major weaknesses in the current system 1) low access and quality of education and 2) dearth and misappropriation of funds (Ejaz, 2009).

a) Governance and Management Issues

For proper implementation of policies, effective implementation agencies are important Various initiatives for policy implementation failed due to weak administrative machinery at the grassroots level. The agencies at this level did not own the policies (UNESCO & Government of Pakistan, 2003). The poor management capacity of the directorates of education at policy formulation levels, school heads at implementation level is one of the many factors which also responsible for this mess. (Ahmad, Rauf, Imdadullah& Zeb,2012).

The KP Education Sector Plan 2015-20 highlights some fundamental shortcomings like weak data and information management which is affecting planning. Many District Education Officers and their teams lack both the necessary information and management skills to develop high quality budgets on the basis required by the Elementary & Secondary Education and Finance Departments. The Punjab School Education Sector Plan 2013-17 also states that the capacity development of the Curriculum Authority is needed to develop and manage standards of education.

b) Absence of Clear Roles and Responsibilities in Policies and Plans

Each national education policy while proposing measures for achieving quality education also took into account the prospective challenges faced within the system. It accepts that the national curriculum is in dire need of reform and understands the need for greater provincial autonomy when it comes to administration. It also understands that lack of proper training and pay-scales correlates directly to a reduction in the quality of education. The NEP thus outlines what is to be done. The NEP does not deal with who will do what, how will something be done and when is something done (Ejaz, 2009).19

Similarly, it was observed that the MSQEE (2016) emphasizes more on the qualitative aspect of standards while throwing less light on the quantitative side. Measuring quality in the absence of quantitative figures might prove a challenge in its uniform application across the country. A much greater challenge in achieving quality seems to be the implementation and

18Ahmad, Rauf, Imdadullah& Zeb. (2012) Implementation Gaps in Educational Policies of Pakistan: Critical Analysis of

Problems and Way Forward. 19Ejaz, N. (2009) National Education Policy 2009 – A Critique

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 17

adoption of MSQE by provinces, particularly after the 18th amendment, since each province is independent to pursue its own education targets as per available budget. The document also acknowledges this fact but fails to elaborate on the system for implementing the standards. The last chapter on framework and guidelines for implementation of MSQE (page 50) suggests that the provincial Technical Working Group (TWG) on education quality comprising Curriculum Authority, the Textbook Board, the teacher training organizations, and the assessment bodies should come together to develop and periodically monitor the implementation of standards in quality education. The same framework also suggests that based on the MSQE, each province and area will develop its own implementation priorities, plans, procedures and monitoring mechanisms(page 51). This loose ended implementation system and monitoring at the federal level seems to be a major impediment in widespread adoption of MSQE and delivery of uniform quality education.

c) Ambitious Targets with No Clear Roadmap

According to (Ejaz, 2009), the NEP 2009 also includes some very ambitious targets for educational spending, provision of free education and adult literacy. These seem to have been plucked out of thin air, with no data provided to show any projections that might have been carried out. In the absence of any such projections, these numbers seem to be more of a wish-list than the result of any careful planning and deliberation.

As per KP Education Sector Plan 2010-15, Education Policies were not translated into Strategic Plans and Action Plans. The lack of policy initiatives to improve the quality of education and enhance learning achievement, has seriously affected education. One feature, illustrating this lack of policy initiatives is the complete lack of school supervision and guidance in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Precise, accurate and clear policy directives produce creativity and adaptability which helps in the effective implementation as well. On the other hand, less precise directive does not leave room for the policy implementers to use their discretion and flexibility which is normally needed for better policy implementation. In the words, it must also be ensured that not just information rather a highly relevant and adequate information is provided on the implementation process. (Ahmad, Rauf, Imdadullah& Zeb, 2012).

d) Lack of Ownership and Political Will

Political will of the local implementers play a pivotal role in effective implementation process. In Pakistan, due to none or less participation of local implementer such as school principals, teachers and students, ownership factor of the policy becomes weak. The success of implementation of a policy depends largely on the political will of the policy makers and policy implementers alike. None of National Education Policies (NEP) was fully implemented which can be attributed to lack of ownership and political commitment, non- allocation of required resources and lack of capacity building to monitor and implement. Ownership is required at all the levels that are political, bureaucratic and community (KP Education Sector Plan 2010-15). Ownership by parents and community participation is also crucial for complementing governmental efforts(Report of the Committee on Education Sector Reforms in Pakistan, 2018).

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 18

e) Lack of Adequate Finance and Material Resources

Saleemi (2010)20argues that financial resources in any system plays the role of a life blood. According to World Bank Report (2000) resource availability must be ensured by the implementers and the policy makers before developing a policy. The resources include adequate number of staff, enough financial support, quality and trained staff. Therefore, it is necessary that equipment’s and buildings must be provided for better policy implementation. According to the NHDR 2018 Report, only 14 out of 195 countries spend less on education than Pakistan while nine of these have a lower HDI ranking than Pakistan.

KPK Education Sector Plan 2010-201521 also acknowledges that additional financial allocation is required both for development and managerial purposes. In its report UNESCO (2005) has found that inadequate financial resources for education in Pakistan have hindered the policy implementation.

f) Neglected Areas

According to UNESCO (2017), ESPs only cover public schooling, despite the significant proportion of Pakistani children in private education (37 per cent). Inclusive education, is another clear gap. Although its importance is acknowledged, the concept is rarely examined in any detail or understood to encompass more than children with disabilities. The lack of disaggregated data along various dimensions of vulnerability lies at the heart of this gap.

20Saleemi, I. (2010). Pakistan Education: Problems And Solutions 21Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Sector Plan 2010-15: p.30

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 19

3. METHODOLOGY

This chapter provides detailed information on the methodological approaches and methodologies that were applied with regard to the aforementioned objectives of the consultancy (cp. chapter 1).

▪ Design: Selection of participants

The sample of participants was selected by the consultant according to their official mandate and relevance as an actor in the field of education. Effort was made to cover all key public and private stakeholders with role in teaching, curriculum and textbook development, teachers training, school monitoring and data management, planning and management of education functions, international organizations implementing education programmes in Pakistan.

▪ Research situation: Information given to the participants beforehand In order to make sure that the study reflected spontaneous and unbiased information, none of the questionnaires were shared with the participants prior to the interviews. Only the purpose and objective of the study was shared through email or through official letters (hard copies)sent to them directly by the Ministry of Planning Development & Reform (SDG Section) Islamabad or the provincial/ area SDG Support Units.

▪ Transcription of interviews:

Prior permission of participants was sought for recording the interviews on a digital voice recorder. It was explained to them that the recording was meant to facilitate in note taking only and would not be used for purpose other than the study. However still many participants declined to have their interviews recorded. The interviews took more time to complete in such cases as more time was required for meaningful note taking. The recorded interviews were transcribed and information put under the relevant questions.

▪ Analysis:

No component of the study was based on intuitive interpretations. The information collected through interviews and focused group discussions completely reflects the on-ground situation. Themes and sub themes were developed for carrying out data analysis.

▪ Verification:

A combination of notes and recorded interviews was used to document the findings. In case of some missing or ambiguous information, the respondents were contacted again over telephone or email for verification of data. Some information was also verified through hard copies shared by participants or where possible through department website/ online reports.

3.1 Semi-Structured Questionnaires

Within the context of quality education assessment, semi-structured questionnaires were developed and used to collect qualitative information from various stakeholders at

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 20

(i) federal/ ICT level (ii) provincial level (Punjab, Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan) and (iii) area level (GB & AJK). The questionnaires, covered:

• Respondents department/ section/ organization’s mandate

• Familiarity or knowledge of respondents about MSQE. Whether read the document, received or seen any notification regarding these quality standards

• Parameters of quality which fell under their mandate

• The extent to which the MSQE or related quality standards were mainstreamed in their province at primary and secondary level

• Factors which are responsible for low performance w.r.t teachers, physical facilities and school environment

• Implementation of MSQE or related quality education standards in the province/ area

• Bottlenecks in the implementation of MSQE at federal and provincial/ area level

• Impact of education departments internal systems on implementation of quality standards

• Bottlenecks in plans, finances, communication, administration, coordination and processes

• Budgetary expenditure on education from 2013-2017 and key heads of allocation and expenditure

3.2 Data and Information Collection

The procedure for all interviews followed a standardized sequence. As a first step, before the meeting took place, an official letter issued by the Ministry of Planning Development & Reform-SDG Section, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad was sent by post (by MoPD&R) or via email (by the Consultant) to the respondents, thereafter an appointment for an interview was requested by the Consultant or where telephonic or email contact was not established, random visits were made to the respondents office.

The actual face-to-face interviews were conducted by the Consultant in the second half of March 2019 and April 2019. In addition to using hard copies of the semi-structured questionnaires for note taking, some face-to-face interviews were also recorded on digital voice recorder (with prior permission of the respondents). Prior to the interview, the stakeholders were informed that all information would remain completely confidential and would not be used for other purposes than the consultancy.

3.3 Key Stakeholders Consulted during the Consultancy

The following tables list the key public and private sector stakeholders (departments, institutions/ organizations) that were consulted on national as well as on provincial level during a six-week in-country data collection exercise in March-April 2019. The stakeholders were selected by the consultant according to their official mandate and relevance to the study objectives.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 21

Table 1: Key Stakeholders Consulted during the Consultancy S# Name Location

ICT/ Federal Capital Territory 1. Joint Education Advisor (JEA), Ministry of Federal Education and

Professional Training (MoFEPT) Islamabad

2. Deputy Chief Development, Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training (MoFEPT)

Islamabad

3. Deputy Director, Quality Enhancement Cell, Federal Directorate of Education (FDE)

Islamabad

4. Director, Academy of Educational Planning and Management (AEPAM) Islamabad 5. Assistant Education Advisor, National Curriculum Council (NCC) Islamabad 6. Admin & Accounts Officer, National Curriculum Council (NCC) Islamabad 7. Director Education, National Commission for Human Development (NCHD) Islamabad 8. Assistant Director, Education, National Commission for Human

Development (NCHD) Islamabad

9. Education Specialist, UNESCO Islamabad 10. Chairman, Private Educational Institutions Regulatory Authority (PEIRA) Islamabad

Punjab 1. Additional Secretary (Budget & Planning), School Education Department

(SED) Lahf4fewqrtnntore

2. Additional Director General, Quaid-e-Azam Academy for Educational Development (QAED)

Lahore

3. Deputy Director (IT/ Coordination, Implementation and Communication), Punjab Examination Commission (PEC)

Lahore

4. Assessment Expert, Punjab Examination Commission (PEC) Lahore 5. Deputy Director, Punjab Curriculum and Textbook Board (PCTB) Lahore 6. District Monitoring Officer (DMO) Lahore Lahore 7. Additional Programme Director, Programme Monitoring and

Implementation Unit (PMIU)-Punjab Education Sector Reform Programme (PESRP)

Lahore

8. Head of Research, Programme Monitoring and Implementation Unit (PMIU)-Punjab Education Sector Reform Programme (PESRP)

Lahore

9. M&E Specialist, Programme Monitoring and Implementation Unit (PMIU)-Punjab Education Sector Reform Programme (PESRP)

Lahore

10. President, All Pakistan Private Schools Federation (APPSF) Lahore 11. Executive District Officer/CEO Education Lahore Lahore 12. Section Officer, School Education Department (SED) Lahore 13. Chief Education, Planning & Development Board, Government of Punjab Lahore 14. Senior Head Mistress, Government Fatima Girls High School, 2 Fane Road Lahore 15. Head Mistress, City District Government Primary School, Chowk

Safanwala, Mozang Lahore

Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK) 1. Additional Secretary (Schools), Directorate of Public Instructions

Elementary and Secondary Education, AJK Muzaffarabad

2. Director EMIS Muzaffarabad 3. Director Budget and Accounts Muzaffarabad 4. Chairperson, AJK Textbook Board (AJKTB) Muzaffarabad 5. Director General, Directorate of Curriculum Research and Development

(DCRD) Muzaffarabad

6. DEO Education Male Muzaffarabad Muzaffarabad 7. DEO Education Female, Muzaffarabad Muzaffarabad

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 22

S# Name Location 8. Coordinator, Kashmir Education Assessment System (KEAS) Muzaffarabad 9. Chairman, AJK Private School Association (AJKPSA) Muzaffarabad 10. Head Teacher, Govt. Boys Primary School, Naluchi, Muzaffarabad Muzaffarabad 11. Head Teacher, Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School Lower Chatter

Muzaffarabad Muzaffarabad

12. Head Teacher, Govt. Boys Model High School Upper Chatter Muzaffarabad Muzaffarabad Sindh

1. Director General, Provincial Institute for Teacher Education (PITE) Nawabshah 2. Director, Curriculum Wing, SELD Karachi 3. Sr. Programme Officer, Sindh Education Foundation (SEF) Karachi 4. Executive Director, Sindh Teacher Education Development Authority

(STEDA) Karachi

5. Director, Directorate of Curriculum, Assessment & Research Sindh (DCAR) Jamshoro 6. Chairman, Sindh Textbook Board (STBB) Jamshoro 7. Director, Literacy & NFE Karachi 8. Chief of Party, USAID Sindh Capacity Development Project (SCDP) Karachi 9. District Education Officer (DEO) Hyderabad Hyderabad

Balochistan 1. Deputy Director, Secondary Education Department (SED) Quetta 2. In charge EMIS, Policy, Planning and Implementation Unit (PPIU) Quetta 3. Focal Point, Policy, Planning and Implementation Unit (PPIU) Quetta 4. Director, Bureau of Curriculum (BOC) Quetta 5. Director, Provincial Institute of Teacher Education (PITE) Quetta 6. CEO, Balochistan Education Assessment Commission (BEAC) Quetta 7. Director, Literacy & NFE, Social Welfare Department Quetta 8. Chairman, Balochistan Textbook Board (BTBB) Quetta 9. President, All Balochistan Progressive Private Schools Association

(ABPPSA) Quetta

Gilgit Baltistan (GB) 1. Additional Secretary Education, Directorate of Education Gilgit 2. Director General Education, Directorate of Education Gilgit 3. Deputy Director EMIS, Directorate of Education Gilgit 4. Director Curriculum/ Training, Directorate of Education Gilgit 5. Director, Basic Education Community Schools Gilgit 6. Senior Manager, School Development, AKES, P Gilgit 7. General Manager, NCHD Gilgit 8. Head Teacher, Government Primary School Sarkoi Gilgit 9. Head Teacher, Government Girls Secondary School Gilgit 10. Head Teacher, Government Boys Secondary School Gilgit Gilgit 11. Head Teacher, Shining Lights Academy Gilgit 12. Head Teacher, Secondary Aga Khan DJ School, Danyore Gilgit Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 1. Additional Secretary (Development), Elementary & Secondary Education

Department (E&SED) Peshawar

2. Sr. Planning Officer, Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED)

Peshawar

3. Director EMIS, Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED) Peshawar 4. Deputy Director EMIS/ Project Manager IT, Elementary & Secondary

Education Department (E&SED) Peshawar

5. Chief Audit Officer, Directorate of Elementary & Secondary Education Peshawar

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 23

S# Name Location 6. Director, Provincial Institute for Teacher Education (PITE) Peshawar 7. Member, Editorial and Publications, KP Textbook Board (KPTBB) Peshawar 8. Deputy Team Lead Teaching and Learning - Adam Smith International

(ASI), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Sector Programme (KESP) funded by DFID

Peshawar

9. Independent Monitoring Unit (IMU) Advisor- Adam Smith International (ASI), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Sector Programme (KESP) funded by DFID

Peshawar

10. District Education Officer (DEO) Male, Peshawar, Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED)

Peshawar

11. District Delivery Unit (DDU), Directorate of Elementary & Secondary Education

Peshawar

12. Additional Director Curriculum, Directorate of Curriculum and Teacher Education (DCTE)

Peshawar

13. Managing Director, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Private Schools Regulatory Authority (KPPSRA)

Peshawar

14. Principal, Government Shaheed Hasnain Sharif Higher Secondary School for Boys

Peshawar

3.4 Methodological Challenges

During the six-week in-country interviews and FGDs, the consultant faced a few methodological challenges, which are briefly summarized in this section. One particular challenge arose from the fact that most of the respondents had not seen or read the MSQE document before; this made it difficult to fully cover all aspects of quality education listed in the semi-structured questionnaire. Consequently, not all stakeholders were able to provide sufficient answers to all questions, as some of them were beyond their personal expertise or knowledge. A second challenge arose due to the format of the semi-structured questionnaire itself. Taking almost 45-90 minutes to discuss all relevant aspects, some of the experts interviewed lost motivation to provide detailed information on all questions and in some cases providing insufficient data. These challenges were partly overcome by making use of alternative sources of information, comprising a review of literature and online sources and contacting the respondents again via e-mail and telephone in the days after the interviews. Some of the respondents failed to provide the requested documents, inventory lists and datasets available, even after several reminders had been sent.

Major Challenges in Data Collection

• The government officials are difficult to track during office hours. Most of the time, either their telephone numbers are not responding or they are not available on their seats or they are busy in some indefinite meetings. The Consultant faced difficulty in binding them for interviews. Even when they made themselves available, interference and distraction due to official consultation by people from the same department or outsiders with no prior appointments, telephone calls were a regular feature. In a few instances, the interviewees left the Consultant in between the interview to attend some urgent meeting. This intermittent response spoiled the momentum of the interview and made the interviewer and interviewee difficult to concentrate or stay on course of the discussion. Due to the unpredictable nature of appointments with government officials, the Consultant had to frequently shuffle the daily interview schedule. Multiple visits

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 24

were made to the offices of government education officials particularly those sitting in the main Secretariat or Directorate.

• The interviews of respondents in main Secretariat or Directorate where a lot of public dealing was involved was marred by frequent disruptions from internal and external people. The Consultant had to rush through questions as it was difficult for respondents to manage time with 5-7 visitors sitting in the same room. However, interviews with respondents with offices in secluded and independent buildings were much better to handle and thereby gave more time for the interview.

• Due to frequent transfers and postings in the education department, some of the respondents got transferred days before the Consultants’ planned visits for interviews. The Consultant had to find the most suitable alternate candidates which took extra time and effort. However, in a few instances, even the alternate respondents could not be contacted.

• Prior permission of participants was sought for recording the interviews on a digital voice recorder. It was explained to them that the recording was meant to facilitate in note taking only and would not be used for purpose other than the study. However still many participants declined to have their interviews recorded. The interviews took more time to complete in such cases as more time was required for meaningful note taking.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 25

4. RESULTS

For this particular assignment a sample of 82respondents including education managers, head teachers, UN and international organizations education staff from ICT, Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Azad Jammu & Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan were interviewed and their technical expertise and knowledge about MSQE and quality education was documented. In addition, three focused group discussions (FGDs) were carried out with teachers, one in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and two in Gilgit Baltistan covering 22 teachers (13 male and 9 female). To incorporate the feedbacks of learners, five FGDs were conducted, one in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and four in Gilgit Baltistan. These five FGDs covered 50 learners (30 boys and 20 girls from grade 5, 8 and 10). The report therefore draws upon the feedback from total 154 participants.

The results of the study have been categorized province wise according to the themes derived from the scope of work.

4.1 Federal/ICT level

Although primary and secondary education is now a provincial subject in Pakistan, the primary and secondary schools in Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) fall under the jurisdiction of Federal Government. ICT has a total of 391 public sector schools out of which 49 percent are girls' schools. Out of these schools, majority are primary schools (49 percent) followed by 15 percent middle, 25 percent high and 11 percent higher secondary schools. Overall enrolment in government schools is 0.2 million out of which 48 percent are enrolled at primary level. The gender parity index of enrolment is 1.12 (112 girls for every 100 boys). The total number of out of school children in ICT is 38,529; 11 percent of the total population of 5-16 years' children. 43 percent of these out of school children are girls. The number of teachers working in schools of ICT is 6,463; 65 percent of whom are female. Survival rate to grade 5 in ICT is 92 percent while the transition rate from primary to middle is 100 percent.22

THEMES

1) Mainstreaming of MSQE at primary and secondary level in ICT/ Federal level a. Knowledge about MSQE in public and private education system/ departments

• One of the key respondents in MoFEPT, who was also part of the development of MSQE commented on the background process of development of MSQE by sharing that “There were many quality initiatives undertaken by the education department but unfortunately, these were not integrated in any standard framework. So a need was felt to follow some minimum standards of quality in education. A vigorous exercise led by curriculum development, textbook development, teachers training and assessment experts was carried out to study education models of US, UK, Germany, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, Bangladesh and India and finally seven areas were identified for developing minimum standards of our own. GIZ was providing both technical as well as financial support for the activity. After several rounds of discussions in various

22Academy of Educational Planning and Management (2015). Pakistan Education Statistics 2014-15. Islamabad

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 26

technical committees, a draft was prepared. It took a long time for the draft to be reviewed in previous ministry (Ministry of Education), CAD and then the current ministry (MoFEPT) and then, finally, we got it approved. The draft was then presented in Inter-provincial Education Ministers Conference (IPEMC) and I presented the document before them. All the provinces were asked to give their feedback within a month. After their feedback, the document was approved with full consensus of IPEMC. Its notification was issued and MSQE copies were printed and shared with all provinces. Letters were written to every provincial education secretary to implement these standards; some letters were sent by MoFEPT and some by the Minister for Education”.

• Another respondent from NCHD further shared that that “I was member of the team that initiated this process. We visited all the provinces to consult all the stakeholders. We initiated its first draft from Karachi. Initially it was ‘Standards of Education’. The word ‘Minimum’ was added later on. Its mandate was derived from 1970’s Act of ‘Curriculum Development and Maintenance of Standards’. Ministry of Education couldn’t make any standards in 37 years”.

• 90% of respondents had seen or read the MSQE document and had some knowledge about various standards under MSQE.

• However, some respondents were not aware about any notification from MoFEPT regarding MSQE.

b. Extent of mainstreaming MSQE

• As per MoFEPT, various education related departments/ entities like NEAS, AEPAM, NCHD are completely following MSQE.

• After 18th amendment provinces are free to allocate resources as per their priorities and MoFEPT has little say in forcing or binding them to adopt MSQE in their respective provinces.

• The MoFEPT is aware that the mainstreaming of MSQE is slow at provincial level. But one of the MoFEPT officials commented that “Implementation of MSQE should not be an issue neither before devolution nor after it. As a matter of fact these standards were not made by us. These were finalized and approved by the provinces themselves. You can see that all the logos are there on the document. So this is not a document of this ministry rather it is a document of Pakistan”

• Based on the MSQE, MoFEPT has also developed the National Curriculum Framework in 2017. It was also approved and sent to the provinces for adoption.

• No evidence could be gathered from PEIRA to know whether standards under MSQE have been adopted by private schools in ICT. The current Chairman PEIRA was also part of developing MSQE.

• MoFEPT shared that as per feedback received from the provinces in the IPEMC meetings, they are mostly referring to the MSQE document for learning about the learner’s assessment and class environment components.

• MoFEPT is of the opinion that the rise in provincial education budgets is also an indication that provinces are bringing improvement by following some quality standards, which requires more finances.

• Baluchistan has increased the budget on education from 7% to 19%; Punjab has touched 29%; KP has 26% of total budget spent on education.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 27

• NCHD is using some of the quality indicators in MSQE in its non-formal schools. Besides it has also developed its own standards focusing on quality, retention, reducing dropout, increase in literacy rate and management.

2) Factors responsible for low performance a. Teachers

• 90% of the respondents shared that teacher plays a key role in low performance.

• As per AEPAM, it has conducted three studies on student’s attainment in which teachers ‘quality was identified as the primary factor in low attainment.

• Most of the teachers have low qualification i.e. only matric so they do not have the capacity to teach effectively.

• Similarly, pedagogy and content knowledge go hand in hand for becoming a good teacher. If a teacher is not aware of pedagogy or child psychology, he cannot teach at all.

• Government sometimes pulls out teachers from schools for other work like surveys, election duties, polio campaigns etc. which affects the learning process.

b. Physical facilities

• Only 10% respondents were of the view that physical facilities play a key role in low performance followed by teacher. However, mostly agreed that only in case of girls schools, it does have some impact on low performance.

c. School environment

• None of the respondents thought that school environment can have some impact on low performance.

3) Implementation of MSQE in ICT/ Federal Level

• Establishment of National Curriculum Council (NCC) Secretariat was a major achievement of the federal government to steer the process of curriculum development on a national level.

• The NCC Secretariat was established in December 2014 with initial budget of Rs. 100 Million, later increased to 209 Million. The key functions of NCC Secretariat were

o To facilitate National Curriculum Council (NCC) to make coordination among various federating units in development of minimum National Education Standards up to Higher Secondary Level (ECE to Class-XII) and National Curriculum Framework.

o To conduct seminars and workshops on curriculum development and to assist NCC to hold its quarterly meetings.

o To conduct Research Studies to analyze the curriculum development across the country.

o To provide Professional and Technical expertise to the Province/ Regions in Curriculum Development up to Higher Secondary Levels.

o Development of textbooks for ICT on the basis of revised Curriculum 2017.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 28

Table 2: Progress of NCC against various objectives

S # Objective Physical Progress

1 To establish National Curriculum Council (NCC) Secretariat 90%

2 To facilitate National Curriculum Council (NCC) to make coordination among various federating units in development of minimum National Education Standards up to High Secondary Level (ECE) to Class-X-III) and National Curriculum Framework.

100%

3 To conduct seminars and workshop on curriculum development and to assist NCC to hold it quarterly meetings

40%

4 To conduct Research Studies to analyze the curriculum development across the country.

0.0 (Activity Withdrawn)

5 To provide Professional and Technical expertise to the Provinces/ Regions in Curriculum Development up to Higher Secondary Levels

Ongoing activity

6 Development of textbooks for ICT on the basis of revised Curriculum 2017 30%

• Based on the MSQE, MoFEPT has also developed the National Curriculum Framework in 2017. It was also approved and sent to the provinces for adoption.

• NEAS (National Education Assessment System), which is an organization of MoFEPT, Islamabad, is responsible for educational assessment across Pakistan. The NEAS had PEACE (Provincial Educational Assessment Centers), which have now been merged with provincial assessment related organizations after the 18th amendment, but still coordinates and works for the NEAS on administration of sample assessment in their respective provinces. NEAS aims to promote quality learning among children of Pakistan by carrying out fair and valid national assessments with the overall objective of enhancing quality, equity and access to education.

• NEAS has been able to conduct eight assessments since 2004 for grade 4 and grade 8 students by selecting convenient sample through its provincial assessment centers. NEAS has conducted assessments for Mathematics, Urdu, English, Science, Social Studies, however Urdu, English and Mathematics have remained major subjects for assessment in the past. After conducting every assessment, NEAS shares the findings of each assessment with relevant stakeholders for policy change. Latest assessment conducted by NEAS23 was published in 2016 that included assessment of 4th and 8th graders. Data was gathered from 1499 sample schools with sample size of 30,000. The following are the key findings:

o 42.7% of the students in fourth grade were overage which dropped to 24.4% in eighth grade reinforcing the assumption that overage students are at greater risk of dropout.

o Parental education is directly associated to students' chances of education. Parents of 23% of 4th graders and 15% of 8th graders had less than primary education.

o Parents of 8.5% of 4th graders were jobless. Children of jobless parents are more likely to dropout as compared to children of employed parents.

o More than 40% of the teaching workforce have more than 16 years of teaching experience.

23 National Assessment Report 2016

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 29

o More than half of the teachers have either taught in multi-grade teaching situation or still practicing it in fourth grade.

o Many highly qualified teachers are available in primary schools, who be raised to the position of head teachers for better academic leadership.

o In terms of student’s achievement for 4th graders: ▪ the highest score in Science was in Punjab with 548 and lowest in GB with

459, the national average score was 484. ▪ the highest score in English Reading was in Punjab with 536 and lowest in

GB with 452, the national average score was 485. ▪ the highest score in English Writing was in Punjab with 543 and lowest in

KP with 453 and FATA with 431, the national average score was 489. o In terms of student’s achievement for 8th graders:

▪ the highest score in Science was in Punjab with 566 and lowest in AJK with 439, the national average score was 478.

▪ the highest score in English Reading was in Punjab with 555 and lowest in KP with 459, the national average score was 488.

▪ the highest score in English Writing was in ICT with 557 followed by Punjab with 549 and lowest in KP with 448 and FATA with 454, the national average score was 496.

4) Bottlenecks in implementation of standards

• Respondents from MoFEPT admitted that there are four main bottlenecks in the implementation of these quality standards. First is the comprehension of this document as mostly people cannot understand and derive the crux out of it. Secondly, there is a lack of implementation mechanism and a lot of weaknesses in our system in developing curriculum, textbooks, teacher capacity, learner standards etc. “Before MSQE no one had even heard about learner standards. Our standard is to just get 33% marks to pass and 66% is the 1st division. This is what we mean by learner standards”. Third, is the absence of monitoring system and fourth is capacity like training of stakeholders on MSQE, which is the responsibility of provincial governments

• Respondents in the MoFEPT admitted that no follow up has been conducted by the federal ministry to know the extent of implementation of MSQE in provinces after these were disseminated. The only follow up or mechanism available to know this is the IPEMC meeting, wherein the provinces are asked to share the status of implementation. The Minutes of the IPEMC meeting are classified documents and not available for public sharing.

• As suggested in the National Education Policy 2009 (NEP), the National Authority for Standards of Education could not be established in Pakistan despite efforts by the MoFEPT. Its establishment could have improved the implementation and further monitoring.

• Coordination between MoFEPT and IPWGs is weak. Inter-provincial working groups (IPWGs) were established containing same provincial representatives who played vital role in the preparation of MSQE. The last meeting between IPWGs and MoFEPT was conducted some three years back.

• There is a lack of ownership of the MSQE document. A few respondents said that the MSQE needs to be revised as it lacks coherence and clarity. “The content of MSQE

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 30

seems another copy-paste stuff without required details and any quantitative indicators spelled out.”

• One of the respondents stated that “The standards under MSQEin its current form are not implementable. These should have been pilot tested before wider dissemination”. These standards need to be revised and brought at par with previous standards developed such as Teachers Standards developed in 2008. Even the National Curriculum Framework (NCF) 2017 is a better document than MSQE, in terms of quality and detail.

5) Impact of education departments internal systems and coordination on implementation of MSQE

• Implementation of MSQE is slow due to lack of coordination between federating units.

• UN agencies and INGO’s are supporting Government of Pakistan to meet the quality standards. For example, UNESCO is supporting Government of Pakistan in mainstreaming SDG 4/ Education 2030 agenda into national education policies and education sector plans. UNESCO also supports federal and provincial education departments in monitoring of SDG-4 through engagement with NEMIS, AEPAM and NEAS.

6) Monitoring mechanism

• There is no monitoring mechanism available at the federal level to monitor the implementation of MSQE at federal and provincial level. As far as the provinces are concerned, IPEMC is the only forum where only progress is shared by provinces on MSQE.

• Most of the M&E functions under MOFEPT are performed using the ‘Project Monitoring & Education System (PMES)’ which is updated on monthly basis at federal level.

7) Analysis of education budget allocation and expenditure (2013-2018)

• As per Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19, Pakistan’s total education expenditure as percentage of GDP has varied between 2.1% and 2.4% during 2013-2018. Education expenditure by federal and provinces is as under:

Table 3: Total Expenditure on Education (Rs million)

Years Provinces Current

Expenditure Development Expenditure

Total Expenditure

As % of GDP

20

13

-14

Federal 65,497 21,554 87,051 2.1

Punjab 187,556 30,485 218,038

Sindh 99,756 6,157 106,093

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 70,948 18,756 89,704

Balochistan 29,978 6,911 36,889

Pakistan 453,735 83,863 537,775

20

14

-15

Federal 73,729 28,293 102,022 2.2

Punjab 201,882 25,208 227,090

Sindh 109,275 7,847 117,122


Balochistan 32,299 8,803 41,102

Pakistan 500,390 98,657 599,047

20

15

-

16

Federal 84,496 34,665 119,161 2.3

Punjab 224,608 26,863 251,471

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 31

Years Provinces Current

Expenditure Development Expenditure

Total Expenditure

As % of GDP

Sindh 123,855 11,153 135,008


Balochistan 36,121 9,364 45,485

Pakistan 561,386 101,970 663,356

20

16

-17

Federal 91,139 16,890 108,029 2.2

Punjab 221,049 39,593 260,642

Sindh 134,650 12,082 146,732


Balochistan 40,571 7,127 47,698

Pakistan 596,891 102,331 699,222

20

17

-18

(Pro

visi

on

al)

Federal 100,428 26,495 126,923 2.4

Punjab 295,893 44,910 340,803

Sindh 152,298 13,705 166,003


Balochistan 47,107 5,673 52,780

Pakistan 721,875 101,277 829,152

The table below (source: Public Financing of Education in Pakistan 2010-11 to 2016-17, Institute of Social and Policy Sciences and Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19)shows the year wise budget allocation under the current and development heads.

Table 4: ICT/ Federal Education Budget Allocation 2013-18

ICT/ Federal Education Budget Allocation (Rs. in Billion) Total Federal Budget

(Rs. in Billion)

Percentage of TotalFederal

Budget Year

Current

Development Total Salary Non-Salary

2013-14 18 (23%) 41 (51%) 21 (26%) 80 3,985 2%

2014-15 17 (20%) 46 (55%) 21 (25%) 84 4,301 1.95%

2015-16 21 (22%) 54 (56%) 22 (23%) 97 4,451 2.2%

2016-17 23 (21%) 61 (56%) 25 (23%) 109 4,895 2.2%

2017-18 - - - 133 5,192 2.5%

• There has been a steady increase in the total education budget for ICT/ Federal area. The total education budget for ICT/ Federal was Rs. 80 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 133 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 66% in five years. The ICT/ Federal education budget as a percentage of the total budget remained around 2% throughout these five years.

• The total education budget is bifurcated under two heads i.e. current and development budget. The recurrent budget consists of salary and non-salary heads. Over the last five years, development budget received smaller proportion of the education budget as compared to the recurrent budget.

• Unlike the provincial education budgets where salary budget receives major portion of the recurrent budget, the budget allocated for salary and related expenses is relatively smaller in ICT/ Federal education budget. Between 2013-18, the development budget remained around 25% while the recurrent budget remained around 75% of the total ICT/ Federal education budget. A major bulk (>70%) of the recurrent budgetwent to the non-salary head.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 32

• In the 2016-17 ICT/ Federal education budget, higher education received the highest share of the education budget followed by secondary education and primary education. Higher education has been allocated 79% of the total education budget i.e. Rs. 86 billion, followed by secondary education with 10% share (Rs. 11 billion) and primary education having 8% of the education budget.

• For teacher education, a budget of Rs. 70.65 million was earmarked for Federal College of Education in 2016-17. The allocation for 2016-17 showed an increase of 6% over the previous year's allocated budget of Rs. 66.64 million.

• A budget of Rs. 28.50 million was apportioned for National Education Assessment System (NEAS) in 2016-17 which showed an increase of 37% over the previous year allocated amount. It needs to be increased to ensure that we are assessing our students regularly and comprehensively.

The table below (source: Public Financing of Education in Pakistan 2010-11 to 2016-17, Institute of Social and Policy Sciences and Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19) shows the year wise education expenditure under the current and development heads in ICT/ Federal area.

Table 5: ICT/ Federal Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18

Federal Education Budget Expenditure (Rs. in Billion) Overspending/ Underspending (Rs. In billion) Year

Current


2013-14 20 (23%) 46 (53%) 20 (23%) 86 6

2014-15 23 (23%) 51 (50%) 27 (27%) 101 17

2015-16 24 (21%) 59 (50%) 34 (29%) 117 20

2016-17 - - 33 (31%) 108 (-1)

2017-18 - - 27 (21%) 127 (-6)

• Like increase in allocation, the expenditure on education in ICT/ Federal area also increased over the last five years. The total education expenditure for ICT/ Federal was Rs. 86 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 127 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 48% in five years.

• From 2013-14 to 2015-16, there was overspending in the ICT/ Federal education expenditure while 2016-17 and 2017-18 showed an underspending of Rs. 1 billion and Rs. 6 billion respectively.

• A major portion (around 50%) of the recurrent expenditure was on non-salary side. Under the development expenditure, more than 90% of the funds were spent on higher education and less than 10% on school education.

4.2 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has a total of 27,506 government schools out of which 39 percent are

girls' schools.24 81 percent of these schools in are at primary level. The total number of

enrolled students in these government schools is 4.22 million. The gender parity index of

enrolment is 0.76 (76 girls for every 100 boys). The total number of out of school children in

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is 2.5 million which constitutes 36 percent of the total population of 5-

24KP Annual Statistical Report of Government Schools 2015-16

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 33

16 years' children in the province.25 69 percent of these out of school children are girls. The

province has a teaching workforce of 125,265 in government schools out of which 35

percent are female teachers. The literacy rate (ages 10 years and above) in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa is 53 percent; in favour of males with 71 percent literacy rate compared with

35 percent for females. Net enrolment rate at primary level (ages 6 to 10 years and

including grades 1 to 5) is 78 percent for boys and 62 percent for girls26. The survival rate to

grade 5 in the province is currently 69 percent while the effective transition rate from

primary to lower secondary stands at 77 percent27.

THEMES

1) Mainstreaming of MSQE at primary and secondary level in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa c. Knowledge about MSQEin public and private education system/ departments

• Negligible knowledge about various standards under MSQE was observed among most government education departments and school teachers. This was in spite of the fact that the Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED), Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was the first education department in Pakistan to approve these standards. 28

• 80% of respondents had not seen or read the MSQE document.

• Only PITE, DCTE and KPTBB showed adequate proof and knowledge about the MSQE standards relevant to their work.

• The regulatory body of private schools in KP i.e. KPPSRA which was established in 2017was not aware about MSQE either.

• Most respondents were unaware about the link between MSQE and quality education targets to be achieved under SDG-4.

• Most respondents had no knowledge about Technical Working Group being established and steering the implementation of MSQE in the province as suggested in the MSQE framework.

d. Extent of mainstreaming MSQE

• PITE which has the mandate of training teachers in the province has adopted the MSQE standards to a significant extent, for designing training programmes for teachers (primary, middle and higher secondary level), teacher educators and developing different training manuals. It has also been using the 17 teacher competencies notified by Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED), Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in August 2014. PITE has also placed the copy of the MSQE on its website i.e. http://www.pitekp.gov.pk/pite/images/TrgManuals/MSQE.pdf

25Academy of Educational Planning and Management (2015). Pakistan Education Statistics 2014-15. Islamabad. 26Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (2016). Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey 2014-15. Islamabad 27Academy of Educational Planning and Management (2015). Pakistan Education Statistics 2014-15. Islamabad

28KP set to approve minimum standards of quality educationhttps://www.dawn.com/news/1228900/kp-set-to-approve-minimum-standards-of-quality-education

http://www.pitekp.gov.pk/pite/images/TrgManuals/MSQE.pdf

https://www.dawn.com/news/1228900/kp-set-to-approve-minimum-standards-of-quality-education



DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 34

• Similarly, the MSQE standards for curriculum and textbooks have been adopted by KPTBB for developing new textbooks or revising existing text books from KG to grade 10.

• For addressing the missing facilities like additional classrooms, electricity, boundary wall, water and toilets (mostly related to the MSQE school learning environment standards), School Improvement Plans (SIPs) for all 27,500 schools in the province have been made by Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED), Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Substantial funds have been spent by the government as per SIPs and improvement has been witnessed in addressing the missing facilities during the last five years. Priority for provision of missing facilities by the government has been the girl’s schools.

• Although school-based improvement by addressing the missing facilities is being actively pursued by the Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED), Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa but there is no qualitative research study or qualitative data available to determine whether these facilities or improvements are completely meeting the minimum standards for school learning environment as prescribed under MSQE.

• No evidence could be gathered from KPPSRA to know whether standards under MSQE have been adopted by private schools in the province. However, the discussion revealed that the bigger chain of schools follow their own pre-defined standards where curriculum, textbooks, teachers training and school learning environment, all areas of quality are focused.

2) Factors responsible for low performance

d. Teachers

• 80% of the respondents shared that teacher plays a key role in low performance. A good teacher can lift the standard of education and achieve required learning outcomes. On the contrary, an unqualified, demotivated and untrained teacher can wreak havoc with the learning process.

• Some commented on challenges being faced by teachers in schools despite being qualified, motivated and trained. One respondent said that “Quality teaching cannot be expected in more than 50% schools where Teacher-Student ratio is high. In most Government primary schools, there is one teacher for 60-100 students. In such circumstances, one Teacher cannot control or provide attention to each student. Eventually, both teaching and learning suffers and students gradually drop out”.

• According to some respondents, shortage of teachers was a key factor for low performance in schools. According to PITE despite the fact that 42,000 school teachers have been inducted and trained since 2014 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the process in ongoing, there is still a shortage of 7,500 (15%) school teachers which are yet to be inducted. According to E&SED, on the average 6,000 teachers also retire every year, so a recurring gap is being faced by the Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED), Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on this front.

• Under various enrollment drives from time to time, the E&SED has been emphasizing on increasing enrollment in schools without increasing the number

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 35

of teachers proportionately, which means that the same single teacher is now being asked to handle even more students after increased enrollment in a multi-grade teaching environment.

• According to a few teachers and head teachers, retention of students becomes a key issue in such environment and teacher also loses interest. Under the multi-grade teaching environment, teachers are overloaded with work and they hardly go beyond a few chapters in a book. Moreover, it is very difficult for them to assess all students so learning outcomes are compromised, causing low performance.

• As per E&SED official website, education is the biggest government department of the province with approx. 188,000 employees.29 Over the years, the department has seen frequent political interference related to appointment of unqualified teachers, postings, transfers etc. which has negatively affected the sacred profession of teaching. The system still has thousands of unqualified and incapable teachers which are causing low performance and affecting the overall learning outcomes.

• According to one respondent “After 2006, the curriculum has been revised drastically, textbooks and SLO’s have become difficult and activity-based learning is being promoted. Similarly training of teachers has also become a key focus area. Due to these changes, some of the old teachers are not used to or keep up pace with the new developments which has deteriorated teaching standards and is causing low performance”.

• Another respondent commented that “the government policy of automatic promotion in primary schools practiced to improve the drop out indicators at national level has led to demotivation among teachers and has been one of the causes of low performance”. The teachers have stopped to take assessments or terminal exams or putting in extra effort for improving students’ performance, knowing well that even without their effort, the student will still be promoted to the next class.

• One respondent commented on the negative impact of abrupt changes in government policies. For three years (from 2015-2018), all grade 5 students in the province had to appear in board exam which was kind of an assessment with no pass/ fail ranking but a grading system with A, B, C, D grades were used. The quality of question papers and marking in all eight boards of the province was also the same. This assessment was based on SLO’s but questions were not from the book. These unseen questions were meant to assess the understanding level of the students and application of knowledge. The preparation of students increased every year and teachers also started taking the assessment seriously. However, from 2019, the E&SED suddenly decided to discontinue this assessment on the pretext that a lot of money was being spent on this exercise so instead of asking all Grade 5 students to appear in the assessment, a 10% sample of schools will participate in the assessment. This year (2019) assessment was held from 3-10 April 2019 and those schools not included in the 10% sample automatically got relaxed. The hard work of three years to mentally prepare

29Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED), Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwahttp://www.kpese.gov.pk/

http://www.kpese.gov.pk/

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 36

students for appearing in exams and assessing their learning and motivating the teachers to put in extra effort for better results of their school, got a severe dent.

• One of the respondents tried to make a comparison of public and private sector school by saying that “When inducted the public-school teacher gets the status of a civil servant with much better perks and privileges as compared to a private school teacher. Government teacher has more freedom and is less accountable so he automatically gets into a comfort zone. Has lots of benefits like increment, bonuses, gets five earned leaves for every one month of service. On the other hand, the private teacher is not paid well, has no job security and is not entitled to many leaves, but still has to put in the same effort or even more to produce result”. That is the main reason that teachers prefer government job over private teaching.

e. Physical facilities

• Only 13% respondents were of the view that physical facilities play a key role in low performance followed by teacher. However, mostly agreed that only in case of girl’s schools, it does have some impact on low performance.

f. School environment

• Only 7% respondents thought that school environment can have some impact on low performance followed by teacher and physical facilities.

• Teachers were particularly critical of the lack of interest of parents in education of their children and putting the entire burden of education of their children on teachers. According to some teachers and head teachers, the lack of support at home where the students spend most of the time or follow up on their education at Government schools was also causing low performance.

3) Implementation of MSQE by Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

• Among the five standards specified in the MSQE document, the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has implemented standards for teachers through PITE, standards for textbooks through KPTBB, standards for curriculum and assessment through DCTE and standards for school learning environment through Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED) conditional grants to meet the basic missing facilities. The focus from 2013-2018 was on missing facilities but the new five-year education sector plan 2018-2023 (still with the provincial cabinet for approval) focuses on quality. This plan also includes revamping of ESRU and EMIS for producing better results.

• Some aspects of quality education are also covered under Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Sector Programme (KESP) (2012-2020). KESP is funded by the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) and implemented through Adam Smith International (ASI) to help the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa realize the objectives of its Education Sector Plan.30 The programme focuses on increasing the number of girls and boys enrolling in and successfully completing school as well as improving the quality of primary and secondary education, improving teachers training

30Improving access to quality education in northwest Pakistan

https://www.adamsmithinternational.com/explore-our-work/west/pakistan/khyber-pakhtunkhwa-education-sector-programme

https://www.adamsmithinternational.com/explore-our-work/west/pakistan/khyber-pakhtunkhwa-education-sector-programme

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 37

and induction programmes, enhancing the institutional and human resource capacity of various departments, and supporting improvements to assessments and textbooks for all children across the province. One of the biggest achievements of KESP is establishment of an Independent Data Collection and Monitoring Unit (IMU) in March 2014 to collect credible data every month from each of the provinces 27,500 schools. If the schools of newly merged districts (i.e. FATA schools) are also included, the total reaches to almost 35,000 schools. IMU has extended its school monitoring to these 7,500 schools as well. Key functions and organogram under Annex-4http://175.107.63.45/NewIMUSite/index.aspx

a. Implementation of learners standards

• According to E&SED, although the 2018-23 education sector plan summary is with the cabinet for approval, the ground work has already been started on that plan e.g. for early childhood education, an agreement has been signed with UNICEF which will develop a model school on early childhood education in one district and replicate it in other schools across the province. Drop out normally starts at early age. When kids are facilitated at early age of 3-8years, dropouts automatically start declining.

• To expose students to the latest ICT equipment for learning, E&SED has provided interactive boards/ smart boards to all 600+ higher secondary schools (one per school since it is a costly item) in the province. The smart boards are used to show video tutorials related to the lesson for conceptual clarity and also downloading information relevant to the lesson from the internet. The teachers can write and erase electronically.

• Each higher secondary school has a dedicated smart room where this interactive electronic board is installed and connected to the internet. Equal access to the smart room is provided to students from grade 9 to 12.

• For developing the inquisitive skills among students and explore the topics further, KPTBB has started including relevant weblinks in the textbooks (such as grade 10 chemistry text book) so that students can visit those weblinks at home and develop a habit of accessing information beyond textbooks.

• During the FGD with grade 10 learners in Peshawar, it was observed that students were confident and expressive. According to them “the teachers are very friendly and they can ask questions without any fear”. According to one student “The maximum students in one class should not be more than 14 so that teacher can provide individual support” They demanded an interactive screen or LED TV in each classroom, as available in one of the private schools in the city, so that concepts are cleared through videos instantly without waiting for their turn to use the smart room.

• The students further shared that group work and group presentations are encouraged by teachers in all subjects specially physics, chemistry, English and Urdu.

• A few students shared that “they have to study physics, chemistry, biology from class 9 and onwards and appear in board exam in class 10 while private schools students are taught these subjects from class 8,so they perform better in these subjects as compared to those in government schools”. They demanded from the education department to look into this handicap.

http://175.107.63.45/NewIMUSite/index.aspx

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 38

b. Implementation of teachers standards

• Implementation of teachers’ standards in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is being actively carried out through PITE which has the mandate for teachers training in the province. Even before MSQE, National Professional Standards for Teachers 2009 (10 standards) were implemented vigorously in the province. PITE has followed the standards for teachers (as mentioned in MSQE) for designing trainings for teachers and has even developed standards for Teachers Education with GIZ’s technical assistance in 2018, based on those standards. These standards have been approved by the Government of KP as well.

• KESP has been providing technical assistance to PITE in developing contents, manuals, modules for teachers by following National Professional Standards for Teachers 2009 (10 standards) as well as those in MSQE. KESP has also assisted PITE in designing the Continuous Professional Development (CPD) Programme for teachers including training manuals and modules.

• CPD also includes one Professional Day in every month for teachers, where teachers are trained on the difficult topics in different subjects. The most recent one was observed on April 13, 2019 in which 53,000 teachers were trained on the same day in 16 districts at 2000 venues. For this purpose, Master Trainers from the same district were identified by District Officers Education and selected jointly by PITE and KESP (after test, interview, demo). The selected Master Trainers were selected and trained by PITE in line with the teacher educator standards. So both teacher educator training and teachers training are conducted as per available standards.

• Teachers education like the pre-service service training for teachers applicable previously has been discontinued by Government of KP and replaced by an alternate mechanism called teachers induction programme, spread over six months (now upgraded to nine months) and covering content and pedagogy both.

• The Government of KP has also done away with the condition of relevant professional qualification like Diploma, B.Ed. CT etc. For teacher’s recruitment and now all teachers are hired through NTS irrespective of the subject studied at Master level. Since 2014, 55,000 -60,000 teachers have been hired through NTS. Hence, merit and transparency in hiring of new teachers is being observed.

• The first batch of teachers having prior professional qualification, under the induction program has been trained for six months since they possessed some prior professional qualification diploma, B.Ed. CT etc. In the first batch13,000 teachers (male & female both) (primary, secondary, elementary cadres) have been trained under this since July 2018. The Master Trainers trained by PITE and KESP provided training to a group of 30-35 teachers in RITEs by forming local clusters of trainees within each district. Each teacher has been given a tablet with pre-loaded android application and material. The teachers study the material, implement it for 15 days and then appear in an online assessment conducted by DCTE. Only those teachers who score 80% in the post training assessment are regularized in the Government service. The second batch of 17,000 teachers will undergo nine months training (since these teachers do not possess any prior professional qualification) as per scheme of studies approved by DCTE.

• During the FGD with teachers, it was observed that teachers are aware about the qualities or traits of a good teacher like subject knowledge, effective and clear

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 39

communication, lesson plans and classroom management, proficiency in the use of audio-visual aids.

c. Implementation of textbook standards

• The mandate for development of new textbooks or revision of existing textbooks is with KPTBB. It has developed 236 titles (210 text books and 26 work books) so far. Before 2016, textbooks were developed by KPTBB on the basis of 2006-07 curriculum. However, in September 2016 a road map was developed with KESP and DCTE support for revision of all text books from KG to Grade 12 in phases and in accordance with the standards defined for textbooks in MSQE.

• Acting on the road map, KPTBB, KESP and DCTE have collectively revised three textbooks from grade 1 to 5 in 2016-17, 14 textbooks from grade 6 to 9in 2017-18 and 5 textbooks for grade 10 in 2018-19. In 2020 text books for grade 11 are planned to be revised through collaboration of DCTE and KPTBB.

• As per government policy free textbooks are provided to all students in government schools. Initially the free textbooks were from grade 1 to 10 but recently it has been extended to grade 12. Hence, Government is spending around Rs. 3.5 Billion annually for printing of around 75 million quality textbooks, provided free of cost to the students.

d. Implementation of curriculum and assessment standards

• DCTE has the mandate for development of curriculum and assessment in the province. KESP has provided technical assistance to DCTE including its restructuring and formation of an assessment wing which was missing previously.

• KESP has also supported DCTE for assessment of teachers for three years i.e. 2015-2018. The DCTE staff has been trained in sampling, assessment tool development, item bank development, SLO’s, data entry and analysis etc. as per assessment standards under MSQE.

• DCTE and KESP have continued to assess primary teachers for content knowledge and pedagogy during these three years as per assessment standards derived from MSQE. From 2019, DCTE is doing the assessment of teachers independently for the first time. The grey areas highlighted in these assessments are shared with PITE for designing and delivery of relevant trainings for the teachers. All assessment reports are compiled and shared with relevant stakeholders and placed on the PITE website as well.

e. Implementation of school learning environment standards

• There are 27,514 (61% boys, 39% girls) total schools in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, including 21,180 (77%) government primary schools, 791 (3%) mosque/maktab schools, 2,673 (10%) government middle schools, 2,227 (8%) government high schools and 643 (2%) government higher secondary schools. 31

3131 Annual Statistical Report of Government Schools 2017-18, Department of Elementary and Secondary Education,

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa http://175.107.63.45/NewIMUSite/images/reports/ASC2017-18Final_new.pdf

http://175.107.63.45/NewIMUSite/images/reports/ASC2017-18Final_new.pdf

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 40

• standards for school learning environment are being met by Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED through conditional grants to meet the basic missing facilities

• As per policy of the KP government, 70% of schools upgraded are girls schools. For identifying the basic missing facilities like electricity, water, toilets, boundary wall, additional classrooms, School Improvement Plans (SIPs) have been developed for all 27,500 schools (primary, middle, high and higher secondary) in the province.

• The missing facilities like electricity are met through installation of solar systems or electricity connection, whichever is feasible. For water connection, construction of additional classrooms and toilets, boundary wall, predefined standards and specifications by the E&SED are used. For greater transparency, the school level civil works are closely supervised by the respective Parent Teacher Council (PTC). Funds are transferred for this purpose to the respective PTC bank account. The capacity of PTC members to monitor physical improvement in schools and financial management has been built by the Government through 5 days financial management training (5-7 members from each PTC). One training having 3-4 school PTCs. A proper guide book has also been prepared and distributed among PTC’s with detailed guidelines for school management.

• From the Government side, the M&E department and Internal Audit Cell of the E&SED monitors the physical work/ construction as per specifications/ quality and, financial verification as well. In addition, the IMU DCMAs also monitors the facilities including bank statement of PTCs to know how much funds have been transferred and utilized or if unutilized the reasons for that.

• For the implementation of SIP’s, KP Government provided Rs 9 Billion as conditional grants in 2017-18 whereas approx. Rs. 21 billion have been spent in this category since 2014. Standard rates of various missing facilities are already defined and vary as per enrollment and topography e.g. the average rates are Rs. 800,000 for additional classroom, Rs. 160,000 for one washroom, Rs. 160,000 - 200,000 for water supply Rs. 120,000 for electricity connection, Rs. 200,000 - 400,000 for solar system etc. IMU is also monitoring the physical progress and financial spending on each school receiving conditional grant.

• Since retention of students and enrollment depends on conducive learning environment, Government of KP has been successful to a great extent, in providing the missing facilities, particularly for girls’ schools. The table below shows a comparison of basic facilities in total number of schools in March 2014 and March 2019 (source: IMU’s websitehttp://175.107.63.45/NewIMUSite/index.aspx). As per available figures, improvement has been witnessed in all basic facilities, particularly electricity.

Table 6: Basic Facilities in Schools in KP

Basic Facilities in Schools Mar 2014 Mar 2019 Improvement

Water availability 74% 91% 17%

Toilet availability 83% 96% 13%

Boundary wall 80% 95% 15%

Electricity connection 62% 86% 24%

http://175.107.63.45/NewIMUSite/index.aspx

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 41

• However, owing to huge number of schools (approx. 27,500) in the province, there are still many gaps on this front. Despite spending over Rs. 21 Billion on providing missing facilities in schools during the last five years, there are 16,661 (61%) schools (primary to higher secondary level) still without basic facilities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Among these 2,203 schools (84% boys, 16% girls) are without boundary wall, 5,047 schools (74% boys, 26% girls) are without water, 7,182 schools (68% boys, 32% girls) are without electricity and 2,229 schools (83 % boys, 17% girls) are without toilet facility.

• As part of the2018-23 education sector plan, Government of KP has announced that all new primary schools to be constructed in future will have six rooms (one ECE room and 5 classrooms from Grade 1-5).

• Play is an important part of a child’s early development. Playing helps young children’s brains to develop and for their language and communication skills to mature. To improve this important area for learners as per MSQE standards, Government of KP has constructed 10,000 play areas(comprising four facilities i.e. slide, monkey bar, swing, see saw) in 10,000 primary schools during the last 5 years. However, these have been constructed only in those schools having at least 10 marla open space available. In future, 2,900 more play areas are under construction.

4) Bottlenecks in implementation of standards The Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is doing all it can to provide quality education to the learners. However, there are many bottlenecks to implement the MSQE and provide quality education to all students across the province. These are summarized under the following heads: a. Plans

• Sudden and frequent changes in education policies are affecting the implementation of standards. For example, the government policy of automatic promotion in primary schools practiced to improve the drop out indicators at national level has led to demotivation among teachers and has been one of the causes of low performance. The teachers have stopped to take assessments or terminal exams or putting in extra effort for improving students’ performance, knowing well that even without their effort, the student will still be promoted to next class.

• Similarly, from 2015-2018, it was mandatory for all grade 5 students in the province to appear in board exam which was kind of an assessment with no pass/ fail ranking but a grading system with A, B, C, D grades was used. The quality of question papers and marking in all eight boards of the province was the same. This assessment was based on SLO’s but questions were not from the book. These unseen questions were meant to assess the understanding level of the students and application of knowledge. The preparation of students increased every year and teachers also started taking the assessment seriously and a healthy competition among schools was established. However, in 2019, the E&SED suddenly decided to discontinue the Grade 5 assessment on the pretext that a lot of money was being spent on this exercise so instead of making all Grade 5 students appear in the assessment, a 10% sample of schools will participate in the assessment. Hence, in 2019, assessment was held from 3-10

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 42

April 2019 in only 10% sample schools while the remaining schools and teachers automatically got relaxed. In other words, the hard work of three years to mentally prepare students for appearing in exams and assessing their learning got a severe dent.

• EMIS section is the backbone for effective school level planning and needs adequate HR and capacity building support to perform its functions judiciously. The section did not have a head till 2018 and the position of Director EMIS was created only in June, 2018.

• Addressing missing facilities in schools and inducting required number of teachers seems to be the two biggest challenges faced by the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Without basic facilities and required number of teachers, the process of teaching and learning cannot continue effectively and improvement in learning outcomes cannot be expected. The plans for both need significant allocation of financial resources on priority basis.

• The data collected by IMU/ EMIS is not used productively. It is a common phenomenon that different sections within the education department are asked for inputs while designing some new intervention but the suggestions are never implemented.

• The planning is not need or evidence based rather it caters to the wishes and whims of a few high officials/ political representatives not undergoing the due deliberation process. The impact of such decisions is often short-lived and results in wastage of resources and time.

• Assessment of private schools is not included by EMIS/ IMU and there is no training of private schools’ teachers so we don’t know if they are following the required standards. By doing this, we automatically exclude 40 percent of teachers and students from our system.

• Some of the multilateral agencies felt that due to government policies and procedures, timely support is not extended to its ongoing projects. For instance, UNESCO is focusing on bringing out of school children into schools, however there is also need for the additional teachers, rooms, provision missing facilities etc. that are usually not addressed in time.

b. Finances

• More finances are required for hiring, training and sustaining of almost 7,500 additional teachers. Similarly, resources are needed for 16,661 (61%) schools (primary to higher secondary level) still without basic facilities

c. Coordination

• There is a disconnect between various units/ sections within the education department and with federal government. It was observed that each unit/ section within the E&SED is working in its own shell. In one instance, a severe bias was also observed on the functions assigned to some other unit/ section.

• There were divergent views about the technical and financial support provided by donors to the education department. Some respondents were critical about their role as they felt constrained to perform with too much interference and dependency. Some preferred to work with them as it contributed to their capacity building and improving their performance.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 43

• The urge or responsibility to achieve SDG-4 in general and quality education in particular is missing. People like to work in their comfort zone oblivious of missing SDG targets.

d. Communication

• The EMIS section shared that it has no knowledge about MSQE as these were not communicated to them and they were neither part of development of the standards.

• The notification issued by the federal government (MoFEPT) to the Secretary Education, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa along with copies of the MSQE document did not trickle down to the lower level within the education department.

• No evidence like copy of notification/ memo regarding MSQE could be produced by the respondents when requested.

• KPPSRA was established in 2017, so it is not aware about any such notification regarding MSQE either.

e. Processes

• High staff turnover in the education department is a major bottleneck for continuity of plans. Most respondents interviewed were found to be working on their existing position since the last 3-12 months, therefore their institutional memory of developments that had taken place prior to 2018 was missing.

• The TWG at provincial level seems dysfunctional. Nobody knows who its members are and how many times it has met and where.

• According to one respondent, “the control of some key institutions like eight KP Boards for Intermediate and Secondary Education lies with the Chief Minister of the province. It has been a standard practice to appoint near and dear ones in these boards on key positions. Such decisions negatively affect the examination and assessment system and also results in other risks like examination paper leakages”.

• A few respondents highlighted that there are several grey areas in the system of paper checking. For example, the paper checker on an average is paid Rs. 25/ for each paper. Therefore, his focus is to earn more by checking maximum number of papers. Eventually, the students are the end sufferers and many hard-working students fail to produce the desired results.

• Similarly, the textbook authors charge Rs. 9,000/ day but are oblivious about the level of understanding of users (students and teachers). The language and vocabulary used in text books is difficult to comprehend by the students and equally challenging for teachers.

• The FGDs with teachers revealed that the students of class 6-9 have to study English, Urdu, Arabic and Pashto language. Of these Arabic and Pashto are compulsory subjects. Computer is also compulsory from class 6-8. With multiple languages, the focus is lost.

• The teachers further shared that they cannot control students as corporal punishment and abusive language is strictly prohibited in schools by E&SED. Students do not complete their copies and teacher cannot do anything about it.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 44

The students take leaves as per their sweet will and pay fine against it which is just Rs. 1 per day. The text books are free and the school fee is around Rs. 150 per month. There is hardly any financial pressure on students or their parents for breaking the discipline at school or disobeying the teachers.

• The teachers stated that parents are also taking least interest in the education of their children and there are hardly any parent teacher meetings.

• The teachers showed their disappointment at no formal mechanism for teachers to provide feedback/ suggestions on textbooks (to KPTBB) and curriculum (to DCTE). They pointed to some glaring mistakes, related to grammar found in grade 8 and 10 English textbooks, grade 9 physics, grade9 and 10 chemistry text books. They said that these books have weak authorship with conceptual deficiencies. Most of the mistakes have been corrected by teachers on their own. Their voice never reaches to the relevant authorities.

• The trainings imparted to staff of E&SED for implementing quality standards within their respective sections/ departments are not yielding much results. For example, one of the respondents attended four workshops spread over two months on data quality standards, organized with the technical and financial assistance of GIZ in Islamabad 2018 but could not gather much when asked about its details.

• There is absence of any accurate baseline data for measuring quality under various parameters. For example, if student learning outcomes are known for a particular grade, only then can an intervention be planned. If the SLO’s are weak in a particular subject then it would mean that teachers require training support to improve their teaching.

• The initial idea of establishing ESRU (Education Sector Reform Unit) was to provide research-based ideas and vision to the education sector, identify weak areas, provide solutions. However, the wing did not perform as per expectations mainly due to high turn-over.

• The politicization of E&SED workforce and teachers in particular, is a pervasive and complex phenomenon which has profound effects on employees’ willingness and capacity to prioritize the core business of delivering high quality education to all children in the province.

f. Structural Bottlenecks

In KP, the structural bottlenecks are analyzed in the light of the vertical and horizontal structures of the Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED), Government of KP.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 45

Figure 1: Communication and Coordination in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Vertical communication (Information flow)

Vertical communication is primarily discussed in two ways; 1) downward flow of instructions / information and 2) upward flow of feedback / information.

Downward flow of instructions

Generally, instructions are generated from the provincial level and directed down to the division and then to the districts, where district level officers implement the same through their Tehsil and lower/ field level staff. In most of the situations, such directives do not cover quality side of the education and only demand statistical information that is needed to be supplied to the higher authorities.

Upward flow of feedback

Upward flow generally happens in response to the directives/ orders/ circulars coming from the Secretariat or any superior office. It has been concluded through discussions that the trend to inform higher authorities with any information that would result in quality enhancement is rare. The sub-ordinate offices would always like to comply with the orders and directives.

Horizontal Flow

In KP, horizontal coordination occurs among the affiliated organizations responsible for quality related functions. DCTE is responsible for curriculum and teacher education. Under

District Level

Divisional Level

Provincial Level

(attached organizations)

Provincial Level E&SED Secretariat

ASI (PMU

)Secretariat

DPI Elementary

DEO

DPI Secondary

DCTE PITE ESEFKP

TBBExamination

Board

Directorate of Curriculum & Teacher Education (DCTE): curriculum and teacher education & training

Provincial Institute for Teacher Education (PITE): Training of teachers Elementary & secondary Education Foundation (ESEF): alternative education programme/

NFE and private schools Boards of Intermediate and Secondary Education (BISE): in addition to assessment of

secondary and intermediate levels, the BISEs in KP are responsible to carry out examination for grades 5 and 8.

Poor coordination among these organizations on quality matters

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 46

teacher education, the DCTE manages operations about pre-service and in-service education and training. The pre-service education matters are dealt through PITE and RITEs (regional institutes for teacher education) where teacher education courses such as B.Ed, M.Ed and others of similar nature are offered. Under in-service training, PITE offers in-service trainings to the teachers. However, there is no continuing professional development (CPD) mechanism that provides classroom-based mentoring and coaching as are offered in Punjab under QAED. It is pertinent to discuss that PEAC (provincial education assessment commission) operates under the DCTE but appears to be operating with very limited scope. The examination related activities are initiated technically by the DCTE with BISEs jointly with district education departments.

In such circumstances where examinations of grade 5 and 8 are preset, feedback system to enhance the quality of teaching & learning is not very effective. Similarly, coordination among DCTE, KP Textbook board, BISEs and administrative sections of the education secretariat is neither frequent nor objective, which is an obvious bottleneck in promoting quality education.

The E&SED should formulate quality enhancement mechanism by enhancing objective coordination and effective feedback mechanism under DCTE, which is operating with limited scope and staff. After 18th amendment, these organizations have not been given full authority and mandate to operate independently and fully to promote the quality of education in the province.

5) Impact of education departments internal systems and coordination on

implementation of MSQE

• Effective coordination of some education departments is producing positive results. For example, PITE frequently coordinates with Director, E&SE for nomination of teachers, with EMIS and M&E for planning and data sharing. PITE achievements are a testament to this. During 2017-18, PITE has trained 1195 (92%) teachers (708 male, 487 female) in Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) against a target of 1304; as part of CPD 2033 teachers (96%) trained as Training Facilitators against a target of 2108; 8198 (90%) teachers trained in assessment of grade 5 against a target of 9100; 807 SST Science teachers (90%) trained against a target of 900; 2025 Head Masters/ Principals of High Schools (135%) trained in Leader and Management against a target of 1500 and 370 ASDEO’s (100%) trained in School Quality Management Initiatives (SQMI) against a target of 370.

• There is strong coordination between PITE and DCTE. Assessment and analysis of Grade 2,5, and 8 students is carried out by DCTE. Through analysis, the hard teaching areas are identified and PITE is handed over those areas for designing appropriate training modules for teachers

• Similarly, KPTBB also coordinates regularly with the Director, E&SE. For technical support the services of KPITB (KP IT Board) are acquired on need basis.

• KPTBB is a key entity where there is shortage of human resource for development and distribution of quality textbooks as per MSQE standards. Against the sanctioned 140 posts, 50 positions in KPTBB are vacant. Even among the 90 available staff, 25% of the staff is busy in the KPTBB warehouse for around 3-5 months of the year receiving, arranging and dispatching textbooks to all 26 districts, which is a time-

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 47

consuming process. The printing of textbooks starts in October every year and the printed books are received from January to March next year. With low human resource, KPTBB struggles to dispatch around 75 million textbooks to all districts before the start of academic year in April.

• Capacity of the E&SED, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has been strengthened with the establishment of IMU under KESP. Decision making within the department has improved on the basis of availability of real-time data for each school. Education Managers can now benefit from regular and reliable data on issues such as teacher and student attendance and available facilities.

Figure 2: Teacher Absenteeism in KP

• With rigorous monitoring by DCMA’s at school level, teachers are also feeling pressure to be present in schools at all time and resultantly absenteeism has decreased from 28% in March 2014 to 11% in March 2019.

• For improving school learning environment E&SED has conducted close coordination with the respective PTC. With their involvement the cost has reduced by almost 50% while quality of construction has improved as well. For example, the cost of one classroom constructed by Construction & Works Department (C&W), Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was Rs. 1.8 Million – 2 Million while the one which is presently constructed under PTC’s supervision is Rs. 0.8 Million.

• UNESCO is supporting Government of Pakistan in mainstreaming SDG 4/ Education 2030 agenda into national education policies and education sector plan. For monitoring of SDG-4, UNESCO has provided technical inputs to Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS) on data collection instruments of PSLM. UNESCO also supports federal and provincial education departments in monitoring of SDG-4 through engagement with NEMIS, AEPAM and NEAS.

6) Monitoring mechanism a. Available mechanism

• A very robust mechanism through IMU is being managed by E&SED, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for monitoring school learning environment on a monthly basis. For monitoring 27,500 schools in 26 districts of the province, 550 male and female Data Collection and Monitoring Assistants (DCMAs) belonging to the same districts have been hired through NTS. The DCMAs have been

28%

11%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Mar-14

Mar-19

Teacher Absenteeism

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 48

trained by IMU in data collection and reporting on an exclusively developed android application.

• Each DCMA is assigned a monthly roster by IMU for schools to be visited in that particular month. Once the roster is assigned, the details (names and CNICs) of all teachers in the particular schools to be monitored are transferred onto their smart phones. On an average each DCMA has to visit 50-60 schools every month in the same District. In hard areas (Chitral etc.) these number are 40-45 due to mobility issues. These DCMA’s have been provided motorbikes (for male) and transportation allowance (for female) as well as smart phones for recording and sharing real time data with the IMU headquarter, Peshawar.

• The DCMAs collect and physically verify various school-based indicators after due consultation with head teachers of each school. This information is then uploaded real time to the IMU database by DCMAs using the smart phones. The DCMAs carry out surprise visits to the assigned schools. However, it was observed that sometimes school management relaxes after DCMA’s visit so from 2015 onwards revisits have been introduced.

• For learner’s assessment at school level, E&SED has launched SQMI (School Quality Management Initiative). Previously, IMU was only handling the quantitative data but since the start of 2019 it has been tasked to capture qualitative data about each school as well (like grade 2 and 4 assessment on similar pattern as conducted by PMIU in Punjab) under SQMI.

• The SQMI is implemented through ASDEO’s (Assistant Sub Divisional Education Officers). Since the DCMA’s are already collecting data which the ASDEO’s previously used to do. Therefore ASDEO’s (each having 60-100+) schools depending on the circle) have been trained for technical mentoring of teachers and collecting qualitative data for each school per quarter (using android application). For this purpose, Item Bank for grade 2 and 4 has been developed by IMU which includes questions on the topics taught to these two classes in the previous month. The ASDEO’s asks those questions from students of grade 2 and 4 and any deficiency/ areas of improvement are discussed by them with teachers at the spot. The ASDEO’s enter the results of the assessment in the application on their smart phones and answers, mean score, how school is performing in a particular subject are all calculated by the android application. All the data collected and complied by IMU is further shared with EMIS and ESRU section.

b. Strengths

• For monitoring, a single questionnaire has been designed keeping in view the needs of various units of E&SED and fed into a web-based android application. This application has inbuilt consistency checks and filtering techniques to ensure the reliability and accuracy of data. The data is further analyzed by IMU’s IT support team and EMIS section of E&SED using various statistical tools as the second layer of data validation. It ensures high quality data for decision making in the education sector.

• Monitoring through IMU has improved school learning environment and school level indicators. The table below (taken from IMU’s website) shows comparison of March 2014 and March 2019 indicators for around 27,500 schools in the province.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 49

Figure 3: School Level Indicators in KP

As seen in the graph above, significant improvement has been made under all basic facilities as well as student and teachers’ presence.

• As compared to the process of data collection and printing for Annual School Census, the IMU process is much more efficient. Previously, the data collection and publishing of Annual School Census report used to take almost six months. Now up to date school data is just a click away.

c. Weaknesses

• There are no monitoring plans or tangible indicators defined for tracking the progress on implementation of standards.

• There is no mechanism available to monitor the DCMAs work in the field and crosschecking the details collected by DCMA’s.


• The overall budget allocation for the education sector in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has been increasing every year during the last five years. Although a major chunk of the education budget is allocated to current expenditures like salaries, the non-salary and development budget has also received uniform allocation as compared to previous years, which is an indication that government wants to continue its focus on teachers training, improving assessment, curriculum and text books development and providing missing facilities, all contributing to quality education.

• The budgetary allocation for education in KP has two heads, i.e. current and development. The recurrent education budget entails the budget allocated for ongoing expenses that occur on a daily basis. Also called the operational budget, this budget includes two types of expenses, i.e. salary and non-salary

• Non-salary disbursements entail operation, maintenance for routine activities of the department and its subordinate offices. At the school level, the non-salary budget includes allocations for items like classroom consumables, repair of furniture and other

77

% 85

%

52

%

74

% 83

%

80

%

62

%

82

%

85

%

67

%

91

% 96

%

95

%

86

%

T e a c h e r s p r e s e n c e

N o n - T e a c h e r s p r e s e n c e

S t u d e n t s p r e s e n c e

W a t e r a v a i l a b i l i t y

T o i l e t a v a i l a b i l i t y

B o u n d a r y w a l l E l e c t r i c i t y

Sc hool Level Indic ators

Mar-14 Mar-19

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 50

petty repairs in schools. Sometimes this budget is routed through school-based governance platforms such as PTC’s, SMCs, PTSMCs etc.

• Non-salary head also includes another component called ‘Autonomy Budget’. This budget is exclusively for higher secondary schools and over and above the conditional grant, each school is provided Rs 950,000 grant per year. This amount is at the disposal of Principal/ Head Mistress to spend on anything like classroom consumables, repairs, for running the facilities. This was initiated mainly to give decision making power to the Principal/ Head Mistress. He/ she can spend the entire amount and even hire additional teaching staff on contract basis @ Rs. 15,000 per month with this fund.

• Development budget: furniture, school improvement, stipends are also covered under this head. Girls community schools for example are covered as well.

• The development head is mainly used for provision of basic missing facilities like electricity, drinking water, toilets, boundary wall and additional classrooms, furniture, playgrounds etc. Expenses on community managed girls’ schools and stipends for students are also included in this head. KP Government had allocated Rs 9 Billion as conditional grants in 2017-18. Rates of various missing facilities are already defined and vary as per enrollment and topography e.g. the average rates are Rs. 800,000 for additional classroom, Rs. 160,000 for one washroom, Rs. 160,000 - 200,000 for water supply Rs. 120,000 for electricity connection, 200,000 - 400,000 for solar system etc. In addition, each school is provided Rs. 5,000 per room for white wash/ paint and Rs. 7,000 per room for repairs every year.

• Before 2014, there was no budgetary allocation for teachers’ training in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and it was primarily supported through donors funding. However, in 2014-15 for the first time, funds were allocated for this important component of quality education in the education budget. Approx. Rs. 3-4 billion have been spent on teachers training during the last 5 years by the provincial government.

The table below (source: Public Financing of Education in Pakistan 2010-11 to 2016-17, Institute of Social and Policy Sciences and Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19) shows the year wise budget allocation under the current and development heads.

Table 7: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Budget Allocation 2013-18

Khyber PakhtunkhwaEducation Budget Allocation (Rs. in Billion) Total Provincial

Budget (Rs. in Billion)

Percentage of Total

Provincial Budget Year

Current


2013-14 62 (64%) 5 (5%) 30 (31%) 97 344 28%

2014-15 72 (67%) 9 (8%) 26 (24%) 107 405 26%

2015-16 88 (74%) 9 (8%) 22 (18%) 119 488 25%

2016-17 91 (74%) 8 (7%) 24 (20%) 123 505 24%

2017-18 - - - 128 603 21%

• There has been a steady increase in the total education budget for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The total education budget for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was Rs. 97 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 128 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 32% in five years. The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa education budget as a percentage of the total budget remained between 21-28 % throughout these five years, the highest being 28% in 2013-14 and lowest being 21% in 2017-18.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 51

• Major portion of the recurrent budget is absorbed in salaries and related expenditure. The salary budget for education has increased by 47% during the five years. The non-salary budget has received substantial increase as it has gone up by 60% during the five years In the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa education budget.

• Over the last five years, non-salary budget received the lowest proportion of the education budget as compared to the development and salary budget.

• Secondary education was allocated 46 percent of the total education in 2016-17, i.e., Rs. 56 billion. Secondary education was followed by primary education with 32 percent share (Rs. 40 billion) while higher education received 19 percent of the education budget, i.e., Rs. 24 billion. Secondary education had also received the highest share of recurrent education budget during 2015-16 while in 2013-14 primary education received higher share of the education budget compared with secondary education.

• For teachers training, a total budget of Rs. 1.1 billion was apportioned for teacher training in 2016-17. It showed a decrease of 2% as compared with the allocated budget in 2015-16. Out of the total teachers training budget, Rs. 752 million (67%) was earmarked for in-service teacher training while 33% of the budget (Rs. 373 million) was allocated for pre-service teacher training in 2016-17.

• For provision of free textbooks, Rs. 2.5 billion was kept in the provincial ADP of 2016-17. The same amount was earmarked under this scheme in 2015-16.

The table below (source: Public Financing of Education in Pakistan 2010-11 to 2016-17,

Institute of Social and Policy Sciences and Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19) shows the

year wise education expenditure under the current and development heads in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa.

Table 8: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18

Khyber PakhtunkhwaEducation Budget Expenditure (Rs. in Billion) Overspending/ Underspending (Rs. In billion) Year

Current


2013-14 63 (79%) 2 (3%) 15 (19%) 80 (-16)

2014-15 70 (69%) 7 (7%) 25 (25%) 102 (-5)

2015-16 71 (69%) 12 (12%) 20 (19%) 103 (-16)

2016-17 - - 27 (20%) 136 13

2017-18 - - 17 (12%) 143 15

• Like increase in allocation, the expenditure on education in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa also increased over the last five years. The total education expenditure for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was Rs. 80 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 143 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 79% in five years.

• From 2013-14 to 2015-16, there was underspending in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa education expenditure while 2016-17 and 2017-18 showed an overspending of Rs. 13 billion and Rs. 15 billion respectively.

• Throughout these five years, a major portion (around 70-75%) of the recurrent expenditure was on salary side.

• From 2013-2017, the development expenditure was around 20% of the total education expenditure. However, it dropped significantly to around 12% in 2017-18.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 52

4.3 Balochistan

Balochistan has a total of 13,279 public sector schools out of which 29 percent are girls ‘schools32. 84 percent of these schools in are at primary level. The total number of enrolled students in public sector schools are 1.04 million. The gender parity index of enrolment is 0.63 (63 girls for every 100 boys). The total number of out of schoolchildren in Balochistan stands at 1.8 million, 70 percent of the total population of 5-16years' children33. 50 percent of these out of school children are girls. Balochistan has a teaching workforce of 45,881 out of which 33 percent are female teachers. The literacy rate (ages 10 years and above) in the province is 44 percent; in favour of males with 61percent literacy rate compared with 25 percent for females34. Net enrolment rate at primary level (ages 6 to 10 years and including grades 1 to 5) is 67 percent for boys and42 percent for girls. The survival rate to grade 5 is currently 34 percent in Balochistan while the effective transition rate from primary to lower secondary stands at 71 percent. THEMES

1) Mainstreaming of MSQE at primary and secondary level in Balochistan a. Knowledge about MSQE in public and private education system/ departments

• Around half of those interviewed in Balochistan confirmed they have seen MSQE in printed form that was published by the Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training (MoFEPT), whereas remaining had no idea about the MSQE.

• Most of the research participants confirmed that the MSQE document expects the provinces to use these standards as per their need.

• Most of the research participants were not sure whether MSQE were adopted by the SED Balochistan or not.

• However, representatives of PPIU and PITE shared that these standards have been adopted by the SED Balochistan.

• During interviews it was discovered that the Secondary Education Department (SED), Government of Balochistan has not taken any specific initiative regarding development of standards at its own.

• They also shared that SED Balochistan has not developed any standards management or implementation system to implement MSQE in Balochistan.

• However, SED officials shared that they are extremely keen to address quality in Balochistan education through several means, and were able to discuss that standards’ implementation is in fact a proper way to address quality concerns in education sector.

• Private schools’ representative, though expressed their disappointment at not sharing the with private schools, in spite of the fact that private schools have a huge share in promotion of education in Balochistan.

32Balochistan Education Management Information System data 2015-16. 33Academy of Educational Planning and Management (2015). Pakistan Education Statistics 2014-15. Islamabad 34Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (2016). Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey 2014-15. Islamabad

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 53


• PITE shared that they have used MSQE (teachers’ standards) in contextualizing and improving teachers’ training system in Balochistan.

• Directorate of Literacy & NFE mentioned that they have referred school environment standards, teachers’ standards and standards for learners while developing their non-formal basic education (NFBE) programme for out of school children in Balochistan. It is pertinent to note that the Directorate of Literacy & NFE operates under Social Welfare Department (SWD), Government of Balochistan.

• EMIS in-charge shared that they have referred to school learning environment standards, but only physical standards at school level could be used in their system.

• SED Balochistan has also been positively using these standards and data collected through annual school census to provide basic facilities to government schools in the province.

• Similarly, standards for curriculum and textbooks were already developed by BOC and Balochistan Textbook Board (BTBB). However, they shared that MSQE for curriculum and textbooks are adhered in curriculum and textbook development in Balochistan.

• Regarding mainstreaming of MSQE, it can be concluded that MSQE are not fully mainstreamed at the departmental level, however, directorates of education has used the MSQE partially and on need basis.

• Regarding mainstreaming of MSQE at schools’ level, the teachers were not very confident in accepting that MSQE have been mainstreamed in schools. Similarly, private schools denied any support in this connection.


• Almost 76% respondents prioritized “teachers” as the key factor in school performance.

• Respondents in Balochistan predominantly confirmed that teachers are central in school performance. All other factors including physical facilities and learning environment are dependent upon the teachers.

• It was heartening to see that Balochistan Government has been recruiting teachers on regular basis and have substantially improved the student-teacher ratio at all levels, such as student-teacher ratio at primary is 23:1, at elementary is 16:1 and in secondary education is 18:1. The student-teacher ratio in Balochistan is probably the best in Pakistan. The respondents shared that after student-teacher ratio, they are keenly working on rationalization of teachers that will make sure that both rural and urban areas have nearly equal student-teacher ratios in Balochistan.

• In addition to student-teacher ratio, low teacher presence has remained a long-standing issue in Balochistan. Owing to hard to reach topographical scenario of the province, monitoring in remote rural schools becomes a challenge, and results mainly in frequent absenteeism. This factor is causing drop-out and also poor academic performance of learners in such schools.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 54

• Instable safety and security situation in Balochistan has caused massive damage to education in Balochistan. This situation triggers teachers’ absence, learners’ absence and limited opportunities for teachers to develop professionally.

• In addition, teachers’ professional development has also been among very serious issues in the province. Weak pre-service education, ad-hoc in-service training and less interest found among teachers in terms of learning new knowledge and skills have resulted in low performance of schools. Both teachers and learners are unable to mark high academic scores in any of the ongoing assessment or examination.

• During discussions, PPIU and PITE representatives confirmed that after realizing the fact that teachers are central in promoting quality of education, the SED has empowered PITE by allocating adequate amount of funds for enhanced professional development of teachers in Balochistan.


• Only 12 percent respondents prioritized physical facilities as the most critical factor in school performance.

• Basic facilities have clear linkage with school learning environment standards. Those who prioritized physical facilities as the most critical element in school performance claimed that this factor is crucial not only in access and retention, but also in quality component as quality facilities encourage to retain learners, which is key to learn more in the classrooms.

• Respondents in Balochistan shared that basic facilities need to be contextualized to a large extent in Balochistan province as topographical, climate and other key factors changes from one district to the other.

• Physical facilities are also critical in motivating local communities for enrollment and retention related factors.


• Only 12 percent respondents prioritized school learning environment as the most critical factor in school performance.

• Almost half of the respondents who prioritized school environment shared that school environment is a mix of teachers, physical facilities and academic support.

• Some of the participants shared that even school environment depends much on the behavior of the teachers, who are agents of change and can transform an ordinary school into quality school.

Priority analysis of these factors

Low performance factors were prioritized by at least 25 respondents in two ways; 1) single factor priority analysis, 2) multiple factors priority analysis. Results are given under:

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 55

Figure 4: Single factor priority analysis Figure 5: Multiple factor priority analysis

3) Implementation of MSQE by Government of Balochistan

Implementation MSQE and standards developed by the SELD has interpreted as under:

Standards for Teachers:

PITE Balochistan has implemented standards for teachers in its existing teachers’ professional development programme as in-service training option for teachers. Standards for teachers are also taught in general courses so that teachers have adequate knowledge about the standards.

The PPIU, BOC and other institutions shared that MSQE teachers’ standards in existing form may not be very useful. Therefore, the standards for teachers must have standards implementation system for the users to adopt and implement properly.

Directorate of Literacy & NFE (SWD) shared that they have been using teachers and learning environment standards to contextualize the same and develop standards for NFBE programme in Balochistan.

Standards for Learners and Assessment:

The BOC and BEAC responded in detail about the standards for learners and assessment. The BOC staff shared that learners’ standards are specifically given in National Curriculum 2006, which has been adopted by BOC in Balochistan fully. However, general standards developed for learner’s act as guidelines for them to develop and review textbooks and also formulate assessment, contents’ development and teaching strategies. The same are crucial in developing standards guidelines for assessment.

Similarly, BEAC, which is the only institution responsible for assessment in Balochistan, shared that the learning standards defined in the curriculum are standard guidelines for

76

12

12

Single factor role in school performance

TeachersPhysical FacilitiesSchool Environment

68

20

12

Multiple factor role in school performance

Teacher & Py. Fac. (1&2)

Teacher & Sc.Env. (1&3)

Phy Fac. & Sc Env. (2&3)

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 56

them, while assessment standards mentioned in the MSQE are also important for us to set up assessment and examination system in the province. The experts in BEAC conduct SLO based assessment for grade 5 and 8 in Balochistan.

Standards for School Learning Environment:

School learning environment standards were primarily discussed with EMIS, directorate of schools and directorate of literacy. The EMIS confirmed that most of the physical elements of the school learning environment are included in their prescribed tools/ questionnaires that are administered annually by EMIS through directorate of schools in the province. Psychosocial elements (peaceful & safe environments, teachers’ irrational behavior, school policies and inclusive environment) and service delivery (basic health services) are not included in any tool or questionnaire that is administered by the SED Balochistan. Therefore, SED Balochistan is partially using the school learning environment standards and are keen to include more having strong linkages with SDG-4 or any other international commitment such as indicators declared essential by the UNESCO Institute of Statistics (UIS). The EMIS head also appeared keen in improving their tools to accommodate additional variables having close connection with quality of education.

Similarly, the directorate of literacy & NFE is using NF-EMIS (non-formal education management information system) as monitoring, data driven management school census system for non-formal basic education in Balochistan. The NF-EMIS includes quality indicators and physical derived from these standards and have also clear linkages with SDG-4 targets and indicators.

Standards for Curriculum

Standards for curriculum are well defined and that the Bureau of Curriculum (BOC) is custodian of these standards in Balochistan. The BOC claims that they have been carefully adhering to the curriculum standards, which they had already developed and that the ones developed under MSQE are quite close to what it has developed earlier. The Director BOC confirmed that these standards have been adhered and used while developing NFBE programme literacy & NFE directorate developed under JICA’s technical assistance (TA); Advancing Quality Alternative Learning (AQAL).

Standards for Textbooks

For developing textbooks, Balochistan Textbook Board and BOC has official mandate to develop quality textbooks for learners of Balochistan. Standards for textbook development under MSQE and standards developed for textbooks earlier by the BTBB positively steer the process of textbook development in Balochistan. Representatives in Balochistan shared that they always use the standards and procedures for textbook development and review process. They have recently applied these standards in developing materials under NFBE programme of the literacy & NFBE directorate.

Bottlenecks in Implementation of Standards

Generally, the implementation of standards is carried out through a comprehensive “standards management/ implementation system” that opens up the standards, categorizes its levels such as inputs, processes and outputs. The system defines the institutions that are custodian of a particular set of standards, and how the standards should be implemented in

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 57

true spirit. For example, the implementation system narrates that the standards for teachers must be used to develop rubrics, tools and guidelines, which will further be used to accredit / or award license to individual teachers. Similarly, this process will be repeated every three or five years to make sure that teachers’ quality is up to the mark/ standards. At the same time, standards for teachers should also be used by the training institutions where they would make sure that the training modules translate each and every standard. Also, the pre-service education institutions must also use the standards to develop curricula, contents and systems of teacher education programmes.

It was noted that standards have been partially implemented in Balochistan without any formal standards management system. Without a management system its systematic and planned implementation cannot be ensured.

The standards implementation is also discussed under certain themes:

a. Plans

• No plan was noticed in Balochistan that could prove any fact about the standards implementation. As said earlier, standards in Balochistan were implemented without any concrete plan.

• SED Balochistan has not yet appointed any person to manage standards or coordinate with relevant actors regarding implementation of standards.

• However, to address quality of education in the province, the SED Balochistan has taken several initiatives. Plans have been finalized to offer alternative education programmes for out of school children, training of teachers and assessment of learners by empowering PITE and BEAC.

• Similarly, plans to improve physical infrastructure in schools in Balochistan have been successfully implemented. School facilities and school infrastructure have been improved with adequate funding.

• Similarly, plans to monitor and support teaching & learning and professional development of teachers have also been devised and uploaded on real time school monitoring system.

• The Balochistan Education Sector Plans (BESP) categorically state to implement the standards and bring reforms quality in Balochistan education system.

b. Finances

• Plans to implement standards and quality parameters for school infrastructure and school facilities were well funded.

• However, standards management system lacked appropriate funding owing to non-existence of any designated position for standards management in Balochistan.

• The plans for professional development of teachers to improve teaching & learning in schools have also been funded initially and are waiting for results.

c. Coordination

• Attached/ allied institutions/ organizations have weak coordination with each other.

• Even the coordination among BOC, BTBB and PITE was observed to be poor, which are key institutions for curricula, textbooks, and training of teachers. In

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 58

fact all these three elements and institutions are inter-connected and have huge reliance on each other in terms of building professional capacity of teachers.

• Coordination with international development partners was also ad-hoc. However, local education group (LEG) was found to be active in addition to some need-based meetings that are held occasionally.

• Coordination with MoFEPT (federal ministry of education) was also non-productive and ad-hoc. After (IPEMC) Inter-provincial education ministers’ conference (IPEMC), coordination with MoFEPT appears to be extremely poor.

• Coordination with formal and non-formal directorates appeared poor, owing to institutional / governance related challenges. The literacy directorate is managed by the Social Welfare Department, whereas it is mandated for literacy and out of school children. Coordination between these two entities with same objectives is weak.

d. Communication

• Like coordination, communication has also remained weak and could not yield better results.

• Official correspondence protocols appeared to be communication bottleneck, which needs to be eased out through ICT/ emails and mobile applications. There are many officers that still rely on postal correspondence from one room to the other room, which appears to be a waste of time.

• Communication between directorate of literacy & secondary education department is continuously weak owing to management by different departments. It is pertinent to mention that SWD manages literacy directorate.

• Communication channels within SED and within SWD are not well defined. Sometimes a particular message is lost somewhere owing to poor communication channels. For example, follow up system or feedback collection under some particular activity appears to be missing. The persons responsible for a specific task is changed during the next meeting. This type of frequent changes even in routine operations damages the activity flow.

e. Processes

• Cumbersome processes followed in education administration are one of the key reasons for weak planning, financing and coordination. Process protocols and SOPs to submit development proposals somehow create hurdle in meeting deadlines and submit the proposals.

• Regarding standards and its implementation, processes are not known to everybody inside the education department.

• Process observed in implementation of standards in Balochistan are ad-hoc without any systematic approach to address the quality.

• Standards for teachers, physical infrastructure, curriculum and textbooks were implemented partially because of their close connection with educational quality.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 59

f. Structural Bottlenecks In Balochistan, the structural bottlenecks are discussed and analyzed under vertical and horizontal structures of the Secondary Education Department (SED), Government of Balochistan. The vertical structure denotes provincial, divisional and district administration of the SED, while horizontal structures describes affiliated organizations working under SED.

Figure 6: Communication and Coordination in Balochistan


Vertical communication is discussed as downward flow of instructions / information and upward flow of feedback / information.

Downward flow of instructions (Top to down)

The instructions of the top administrative tier are generated from the provincial level secretariat and are directed down to the districts through Directorate of Public Instructions (DPI). The district level education officers implement these instructions and directives through their Tehsil and field level education staff. Such information is either posted through regular post or through calling joint meetings where District education officers attend the DPI office or secretariat meetings.

Upward flow of feedback (Bottom up)

Upward feedback or information goes up to the highest administrative tier in response to the orders/ circulars issued by the superior offices; Divisional or provincial offices. The education department staff has confirmed that bottom up information flow is inquiry/ question based, whereas other information that aims to enhance the quality as feedback system is virtually non-existent.

Horizontal coordination/ information Flow

The coordination among the affiliated organizations such as Balochistan Education Assessment Commission (BEAC), PITE, Bureau of Curriculum (BOC) and Balochistan Textbook Board (BTBB) is not frequent. Coordination among these organizations, which are primarily responsible for quality enhancement are ad-hoc and need based; generally occurring in unusual circumstances to collect information to satisfy the inquiries of higher authorities or are triggered by the donor agencies especially those working on quality uplift.

District Level

Divisional Level

Provincial Level


Provincial Level Secondary Education Department (SED) Secretariat

PPIU Secretariat

DPI Secondary

DEO

BOC PITE BEAC BTBB

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 60

Theoretically and practically, the assessment findings should inform the curriculum and textbook board so as these organizations could develop quality and contextually appropriate curriculum and related teaching & learning materials. Similarly, these organizations such as BOC and BTBB should keep a constant liaison with PITE to develop quality materials for the training of teachers and eventually all such findings should help in improving the teacher education programmes in the province. But unfortunately, there is no such mechanism in place that could initiate a feedback system for quality improvement.

The following diagram explains the ideal relationship among these organizations:

Figure 7: Relationship between Organizations in Balochistan

The Policy, planning and implementation unit (PPIU) in Balochistan, as focal point for all policy affairs in education, must act as central entity to enhance objective coordination among these organizations to enhance the quality of education in the province. This may be initiated by setting standards for teachers, learning environment, learners, textbooks and curricula followed by a comprehensive standards management system, which would allow to set up an operational feedback system. This system will certainly improve the standards-based quality education.


The administrative structure / organogram of the SED Balochistan explains a long list of attached institutions/ organizations working to ensure quality and standards in Balochistan. Although there is no direct position or organization/ section within the SED that claims to work on standards, quality has been a target of many of these institutions.

BEAC

•carry out assessment

•inform the policy and curricula

BOC and BTBB

•should use assessment findings to improve curricula

•should improve textbooks

PITE

•should use findings and improved curricula and textbooks to tailor and improve training contents

PITE/ teacher education

•the new curricula, trainign contents to be used to improve teacher education programmes for quality teachers

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 61

Figure 8: Allied Institutions of the SED Balochistan

Out of total 10 attached institutions, five are primarily responsible for quality of education in the province. These include BOC, PITE, BTBB, BEAC and examination board. BOC through implementation of standards for learners, BEAC through standards for assessment, PITE through standards for teachers and BTBB through textbook standards are trying their level best to implement standards and raise the quality standards in Balochistan.

5) Monitoring Mechanism a. Available Mechanism

Mechanism for monitoring in Balochistan is known as Real Time School Monitoring System (RTSMS). PPIU and EMIS are responsible entities for RTSMS, which monitors following indicators:

• Student Attendance

• Staff Attendance

• School Facilities

• School Infrastructure

• Teaching & Learning

• Schools Visited By EDO

• Professional Development

• Funds Utilized

Indicators number 5 relating to teaching & learning and number 7 that relates to professional development of teachers are directly related to quality. Although scores of these indicators are low, yet it is useful and important to include these indicators in the RTSMS. These indicators have a clear connection with “teachers standards”, “textbook” and “learners’ standards”, while other indicators produce a strong linkage with learners’ standards and school environment standards. However, the responsible persons were not very much sure about linking these indicators with standards implementation.

Secretary SED

Directorate of Schools

Management of schools

through provincial,

divisionl and district set

up

Directorate of Colleges

To manage colleges in

the province

PPIU

Policy, planning & implementation unit to steer policy,

sector planning

and implementa

tion

BOC

Curriculum developmen

t and improveme

nt in Balochistan.

PITE

Teacher education,

and training

BEAC

assessment &

examination of grades 5

and 8 in balochistan

BTBB

Textbook developmen

t and improveme

nt in Balochistan

Examination Board

Eeducation board in

Balochistan to manage

examinations of grades 9, 10, 11 &

12

BEEF

To education

endowment fund to support youth in

Balochsiatn for socio-economic

development

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 62

b. Strengths

• The Real Time School Monitoring System (RTSMS) has been upgraded and includes quality indicators as well.

• The monitoring system has impacted a lot and indicators about learners’ attendance, teachers’ attendance, physical facilities, and admin visits have shown dramatic improvements in the past few months.

• The ranking of districts has created a healthy competition among districts and think out of the box to improve their ranking.

• SED’s policy is being decided primarily by this monitoring system through online access to the district raking and indicators used in it.

c. Weaknesses

• Quality of data that is received through independent monitors is questioned in some areas. However, it is not more than 5 to 10 percent, which is acceptable.

• Only two indicators pertaining to quality are being captured and methods to collect data of these indicators appears to be somehow not very effective. Monitors are not well trained on measuring the teaching & learning and suggesting professional development to the teachers. Therefore, these two indicators may not obtain accurate data.

• Reporting of RTSMS and sharing of reports with relevant stakeholders is not frequent. However, RTSMS is available online for everyone for wide scale sharing.


• The overall budget allocation for the education sector in Balochistan has been increasing every year during the last five years. Although a major chunk of the education budget is allocated to current expenditures like salaries, the non-salary and development budget has also received uniform allocation as compared to previous years, which is an indication that government wants to continue its focus on teachers training, improving assessment, curriculum and text books development and providing missing facilities, all contributing to quality education.

• The budgetary allocation for education in Balochistan has two heads, i.e. current and development. The recurrent education budget entails the budget allocated for ongoing expenses that occur on a daily basis. Also called the operational budget, this budget includes two types of expenses, i.e. salary and non-salary

• Non-salary disbursements entail operation, maintenance for routine activities of the department and its subordinate offices. At the school level, the non-salary budget includes allocations for items like classroom consumables, repair of furniture and other petty repairs in schools. Sometimes this budget is routed through school-based governance platforms such as PTC’s, SMCs, PTSMCs etc.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 63


Table 9: Balochistan Education Budget Allocation 2013-18

Balochistan Education Budget Allocation (Rs. in Billion) Total Provincial


Percentage of Total


Current


2013-14 21 (62%) 3 (9%) 10 (29%) 34 198 17%

2014-15 26 (64%) 3 (7%) 12 (29%) 41 215 19%

2015-16 33 (67%) 6 (12%) 10 (20%) 49 243 20%

2016-17 37 (77%) 5 (10%) 6 (13%) 48 289 17%

2017-18 - - - 52 328 16%

• There has been a steady increase in the total education budget for Balochistan. The total education budget for Balochistan was Rs. 34 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 52 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 51% in five years. The Balochistan education budget as a percentage of the total budget remained between 16-20% throughout these five years, the highest being 20% in 2015-16 and lowest being16% in 2017-18.


• Major portion of the recurrent budget is absorbed in salaries and related expenditure. The salary budget for education has increased by 76% during the five years. The non-salary budget has increased by 67% during the five years In the Balochistan education budget.

• It is worth noting that the decline in percentage share of education has been significantly steep in case of development budget. The share of development budget for education has dropped from 29 percent of the total budget in 2013-14 to 6 percent in 2016-17.

• For teachers training, a budget of Rs. 953 million was allocated in 2016-17 which was 7% more than the previous fiscal year. Out of the total teacher training budget for 2016-17, Rs. 462 million (48 percent) was earmarked for pre-service teacher training while 52 percent of the budget (Rs. 491 million) was allocated for in-service teacher training.

• For data management, Rs. 35 billion was earmarked for Balochistan Education Management Information System (BEMIS). This showed a significant increase of Rs. 9 million compared with the allocated budget in 2015-16.

• The 2016-17 education budget of Balochistan included Rs. 1.5 billion for health and medical education. This showed an increase of Rs. 197 million (15 percent) compared with the allocated budget for this purpose in 2015-16.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 64

The table below (source: Public Financing of Education in Pakistan 2010-11 to 2016-17, Institute of Social and Policy Sciences and Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19) shows the year wise education expenditure under the current and development heads in Balochistan.

Table 10: Balochistan Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18

Balochistan Education Budget Expenditure (Rs. in Billion) Overspending/ Underspending (Rs. In billion) Year

Current


2013-14 26 (76%) 3 (9%) 5 (15%) 34 0

2014-15 28 (74%) 3 (8%) 7 (18%) 38 (-3)

2015-16 30 (68%) 6 (14%) 8 (18%) 44 (-5)

2016-17 - - - 48 0

2017-18 - - - 53 1

• Like increase in allocation, the expenditure on education in Balochistan also increased over the last five years. The total education expenditure for Balochistan was Rs.34 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 53 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 56% in five years.

• Except year 2014-2016, the allocated budget was almost entirely utilized.

• A major portion (around 70%) of the recurrent expenditure was on salary side.

4.4 Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK)

THEMES

1) Mainstreaming of MSQE at primary and secondary level in AJK

The literacy rate of AJK is 77% (88% for male and 65% for female). 35 There are 2,866 primary schools, 1047 middle schools, 805 high schools and 89 higher secondary schools in total 10 districts of AJK. There are 506,639 students enrolled in these schools. The Teacher-Student ratio is 20:1 for boys’ schools and 16:1 for girls’ schools.

a. Knowledge about MSQE in public and private education system/departments

• Negligible knowledge about MSQE among staff of Directorate of Public Instructions Elementary and Secondary Education, AJK.

• As per officials of Directorate of Public Instructions Elementary and Secondary Education, AJK, it has developed its own standards for Learners, Teachers, Curriculum and Textbooks, Assessment, School Learning Environment with assistance from the federal government.

• The extent to which the locally developed standards meet the MSQE is not known.

35 AJK Statistical Year Book 2017

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 65


• Hard copies of the MSQE document were received by Directorate of Public Instructions Elementary and Secondary Education, AJK from MoFEPT and these were further shared with relevant education offices as well.

• However, the process of its further dissemination and adoption up to school level was stalled.

• AJK Private Schools Regulatory Authority (AJKPSRA) which was established in 2006 was neither consulted during the development of MSQE nor has it received any notification from the AJK Government or copies of the MSQE booklet to adopt or implement these standards in private schools.


• Majority of respondents thought that teacher had a key role in performance at school level.

• Teachers are not much aware about basic quality standards for teachers.

• The teachers lack proper training. Even those who undergo some short-term trainings arranged by the education department or NGOs fail to make any difference as there is no assessment of teachers to measure the impact of trainings on improved teaching and learning of students.

• Postings and transfers of teachers on political basis negatively affects the motivation and quality of teaching.

• Teaching methodologies are largely based on rote learning, rather than being interactive, activity-based and student centred.


• Most respondents did not think that physical facilities were a cause of low performance.


• Most respondents did not think that school environment was a cause of low performance.

3) Implementation of MSQE in AJK

• There is no mechanism available within the Directorate of Public Instructions Elementary and Secondary Education, AJK to gauge the implementation of standards under MSQE.

• Private schools running under the ambit of AJK Private Schools Regulatory Authority (AJKPSRA) also do not have any quality standards to follow. AJKPSRA has not initiated any steps in this regard.

• The only department that seems to have adopted the standards is the AJK Text Book Board. (AJKTBB) which was also involved in development of the standards. As per AJKTBB, it has fully complied with the textbook standards. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) have been drafted for implementation of the text book standards and all technical staff of AJKTBB has been oriented about those SOPs. Based on the SOPs two rounds of textbook development has also been completed.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 66

4) Bottlenecks in implementation of standards a. Plans

• No implementation guidelines on how to implement MSQE have been received by Directorate of Public Instructions Elementary and Secondary Education, AJK from the federal government. The Directorate has also not developed such guidelines on its own.

• There is no follow up by the federal government or AJK government after sharing of MSQE document with relevant stakeholders. Therefore, it is difficult to assess the progress.

• The curriculum taught in schools is obsolete and needs to be updated as per modern day needs of learners.

b. Finances

• Due to financial constraints, 2006 curriculum is being followed. DCRD is willing to revise the curriculum as per latest needs if this constraint is removed.

c. Coordination

• Every unit of the education department is working in isolation and does not have time and interest to go an extra mile for implementation of MSQE or other quality standards.

• There is no coordination at all among various sections/ departments of the education department to discuss and devise an action plan or framework for its implementation.

• District education officers (DEOs/ AEOs) find it hard to collect data from schools in time. Delays in collecting the required data sometimes affects planning.

d. Communication

• The teachers at school level have not been communicated standards under MSQE. Neither have they received any notification to implement any standards at school level.

e. Processes

• The teachers or education department staff did not receive any orientation or training about MSQE and its further implementation.


• Implementation of MSQE is non-existent due to factors covered under the bottlenecks above


• The EMIS section collects data on some quality indicators at the school level every year by involving teachers.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 67

• The data entry is carried out at district level and compiled at the headquarter level. It roughly takes two months to complete the exercise covering some 3300 schools (primary, middle, high, higher secondary) in AJK.

• The EMIS section generates about eight statistical reports for sharing with internal and external stakeholders.

b. Strengths

• Mostly quantitative data is collected and available for planning.

c. Weaknesses

• No qualitative indicators are collected to measure quality learning.

7) Budget expenditure (2013-2018) on quality

• The overall budget allocation for the education sector in AJK has been increasing every year during the last five years. Although a major chunk of the education budget is allocated to salaries, the non-salary budget has also received uniform allocation as compared to previous years, which is an indication that government wants to continue its focus on teachers training, improving assessment, curriculum and text books development and providing missing facilities, all contributing to quality education.

• The budgetary allocation for education in AJK has two main heads, i.e. salaries and non-salaries. The non-salary budget is used for maintenance of schools and allowances of education staff. The table below shows the year wise budget from 2013 to 2018. The allocation for education as a percentage of total provincial budget has remained static at around 22%.

Table 11: Education Budget of AJK 2013-2018

Year Salaries Non-Salaries Total Total Budget (Rs. Millions)

Percentage of Total

AJK Budget

2013-14 Female 5,633.593 53.161 5,686.754

13,184.394 23.67 % Male 7,438.216 59.424 7,497.640

2014-15 Female 6,042.367 59.388 6,101.755

13,992.255 22.57 % Male 7,822.800 67.700 7,890.500

2015-16 Female 6,598.396 57.069 6,655.465

15,044.865 22.12 % Male 8,331.048 58.352 8,389.400

2016-17 Female 7,704.046 55.111 7,759.157

16,548.176 22.51 % Male 8,728.921 60.098 8,789.019

2017-18 Female 7,925.098 56.902 7,982.000

18,030.132 21.21 % Male 9,988.154 59.978 10,048.132

2018-19 Female - - -

19,500.000 18.02 % Male - - -

4.5 Gilgit Baltistan (GB)

THEMES

1) Mainstreaming of MSQE at primary and secondary level in Gilgit Baltistan

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 68


• Some 4-5 staff members of Directorate of Education, GB (including curriculum and textbooks) were involved in the development of MSQE so they have the knowledge and understanding of MSQE. The EMIS section was unfamiliar with these standards while the curriculum and textbook section confirmed to have received the MSQE books along with a notification from Secretary Education GB for further dissemination to each section and each school.

• Not much knowledge about MSQE available with private schools particularly run under the umbrella of AKES, P.

• Serious effort to disseminate the standards to the school level was not made. There are around 1400 Government schools in GB and the Directorate requested the federal government to provide these many copies to ensure that each school receives its copy. However, only 150 copies were received. The Directorate did not have funds to print the remaining 1250 copies so asked schools to make their own arrangements for photocopies of the same document.


• The MSQE document was received by the Directorate of Education, GB from the federal government. As per Directorate of Education, the copies of MSQE were disseminated to all relevant sections and schools without developing any implementation guidelines. There is no feedback or monitoring system with the Directorate to know as to what extent these have been mainstreamed within the sections and at primary and secondary level.

• These standards were not shared by the Directorate of Education with private schools.

• Before MSQE, the standards defined in Gilgit Baltistan Education Strategy 2015-30 were followed by the Directorate of Education, GB. The Gilgit Baltistan Education Strategy 2015-3036 developed in May 2008 and revised in 2014 jointly by Directorate of Education, AKF and AKES, P revolves around three main components i.e. access and equity, governance and management, quality and relevance. The document also specifies standards for a learner, a teacher, a head teacher, a classroom, an institution, a community and an education system to be achieved by 2025.

Access and Equity Governance and Management

▪ Gender equity throughout the whole education system at all levels

▪ Inclusive education wherever possible; special centres for those learners who cannot be integrated into mainstream education

▪ Access to Early Childhood Education for all 3–5 year olds

▪ Free and compulsory Universal Elementary Education

▪ Access to free education up to matriculation ▪ Access to education beyond matriculation

▪ Status of teachers raised through analysing salary levels by comparison with other professions where applicable. Salaries and promotion for teachers will be linked to both level of qualifications and classroom performance

▪ Quality of teaching improved through strengthened pre-service and in-service training programmes, with additional teacher training colleges established

▪ Incentives provided to attract teachers where there is a shortage, and for teachers

36 GB Education Strategy 2015-2030 http://gbdoe.edu.pk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Gilgit-Baltistan-Education-Strategy-2015-30.pdf

http://gbdoe.edu.pk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Gilgit-Baltistan-Education-Strategy-2015-30.pdf


DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 69

Access and Equity Governance and Management

for all who wish, through establishment of colleges and provision of scholarships and other financial incentives for needy families

▪ Distance learning opportunities available for all – education considered to be a lifelong process

in remote and difficult areas ▪ Heads and teachers appointed on merit;

head teachers required to be and recognized as professional leaders

▪ Professional support to teachers from both training providers and DEOs

▪ Schools and colleges managed with participation of communities

▪ Public–Private Partnerships strongly encouraged

▪ Private schools available for those who wish

▪ A review of the GB Ed Department roles and responsibilities in the wake of the 18thAmendment

Quality and Relevance

▪ Medium of instruction for the first three years of the learner’s education to be the mother tongue wherever possible; thereafter Urdu or English according to local decision

▪ Teaching methodologies based on principles of active, student-centred learning with a focus not just on knowledge, but also on skills, problem solving, creative thinking and analytical thinking

▪ Curriculum, learning materials and assessment systems at all levels revised according to the requirements of Gilgit-Baltistan

▪ Computers with internet connection an integral part of schools, colleges and classrooms

• Although both Gilgit Baltistan Education Strategy and MSQE focus on quality education but since implementation guidelines are available for the former so the Directorate is pursuing the strategy on a priority basis. It has further disseminated the strategy and guidelines at the school level.

• Aga Khan Education Service, Pakistan (AKES,P)37 is a key stakeholder in education sector in GB. It currently operates 152 schools in GBC (Gilgit Baltistan and Chitral), providing quality educational access to over 32,800 students, of which almost 50 percent are female. AKES,P has developed its own quality standards for learners, teachers, curriculum and textbooks, assessment, school learning environment. It has implemented these standards in all its schools through its Regional School Development Units (RSDUs). These standards were developed in consultation with Aga Khan University Professional Development Centre Gilgit, Directorate of Education, GB, Aga Khan Education Service, Pakistan and communities. Since the respondents had not seen MSQE document so they were not sure to what extent the locally developed standards were meeting MSQE. AKESP,P has also developed a framework for implementation of these standards.

• Similarly the Ministry of Federal Education & Professional Training, Government of Pakistan through Directorate General of Basic Education Community Schools (BECS) Islamabad has developed its own standards for teachers, assessment and school environment in 2007 for its non-formal primary schools and shared with their respective offices in GB. Orientation sessions for BECS staff to implement these standards have been conducted in GB.

37AKES,Phttps://www.agakhanschools.org/pakistan

https://www.agakhanschools.org/pakistan

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 70

• NCHD has also developed its standards for learners, teachers and school environment. An implementation framework or system is developed by National Training Institute (NTI) for NCHD to implement these standards.


• The teacher training curriculum is outdated. Teachers need better training both subject specific and in more modern teaching–learning methodologies with increased emphasis on well-supervised classroom-based practice during training

• There is no follow-up to training to assess the changes in classroom teaching–learning practices. The support mechanism from district education offices focuses on administration rather than professional support to teachers.

• Merit in teacher’s recruitment has often been ignored therefore the profession is often seen as the career of ‘last resort’.

• The practice of transferring teachers either with or without their agreement often leads to lack of commitment to the school and community to which they are posted.

• Teaching is based almost entirely on textbooks – there is an absence of supplementary teaching materials.

• Teachers and other officers are frequently transferred through political and religious influence, thereby creating instability in the system. Job insecurity negatively affects the quality of teaching.

• Teaching methodologies are largely based on rote learning, rather than being interactive, activity-based and student centred.


• The physical environment in schools is often unattractive, with uninspiring teaching methodologies and teacher punishments, leading to non-attendance and dropout.

• Lack of good water and sanitation facilities is a disincentive, especially for girls. Many schools lack facilities like libraries, laboratories, furniture and sports facilities.

• Schools are not up-to-date with new technologies, particularly computers.

c. School Environment

• Overcrowded classrooms are a further disincentive to learning, and make it difficult or impossible for teachers to practise active, student-centred learning in a multi-grade environment. Government will therefore define the maximum number of learners there should be in a class, and gradually recruit and deploy teachers so that these numbers are attained.

3) Implementation of MSQE in Gilgit Baltistan

There is no mechanism available within the Directorate of Education, GB to gauge the implementation of standards under MSQE in GB. It has simply followed the Secretary Education’s instructions of dissemination of MSQE document up to school level.

Since long, the textbooks taught in government schools of GB are developed by Punjab Textbook Board, which have been developed in the light of textbooks standards, so GB is also indirectly adhering to the same curriculum and textbook standards.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 71


• No implementation guidelines or plans on how to implement MSQE have been received by Directorate of Education GB from the federal government. The Directorate has also not developed any guidelines on its own.

• GB Education Strategy included establishment of Curriculum Development and Research Centre (CDRC) for Gilgit-Baltistan to adapt or develop textbooks and/or other teaching–learning materials according to local needs. Not much progress has taken place on this front.

• The school curriculum is federally administered and is sometimes not relevant to Gilgit-Baltistan. The curriculum documents are frequently not available in schools. Learning objectives are not clear. There is an imbalance across subjects, with creative subjects neglected.

b. Finances

• Training of EMIS staff has been planned but not carried out due to budgetary constraints

• No dedicated finances with the Directorate of Education GB for implementation of standards by carrying out orientation sessions for education managers and teachers. A dedicated unit needs to be established for this purpose.

c. Coordination

• Due to the absence of a dedicated M&E section in Directorate of Education, GB, various analytical data and reports cannot be generated.

• EMIS and other sections cannot coordinate effectively with M&E.

• Weak coordination between EMIS and Curriculum and text book section

d. Processes

• The teachers or education department staff did not received any orientation or training on how to implement the standards under MSQE.

• No mechanism has been developed to monitor the implementation of MSQE.

• Retention of good teachers for implementation of quality education standards is a must. Currently, AKES,P is finding it difficult to retain teachers.

• Although government has M&E systems in place, including EMIS, they are not effective in identifying gaps and generating information for effective decision making, e.g. ensuring schools have an equitable allocation of teachers.

5) Impact of education departments internal systems and coordination on

implementation of MSQE

• There is shortage of HR and finances for implementing various standards under MSQE in various sections of the Directorate. Many officers are holding multiple posts due to similar constraints. For example curriculum and teachers training is being handled by one Director, similarly a Deputy Director EMIS is also holding additional charge of M&E.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 72

• There is no appraisal system of staff linked to promotion and remuneration. There are no incentives for those who perform well, or sanctions against those who perform badly.

• Directorate of Education GB has weak capacity to implement and monitor the standards. A dedicated unit is needed for this purpose.

• To enhance the quality of professional development for teachers in GB, Aga Khan University’s Professional Development Centre for Northern Areas (PDCN) was established in DB in 1999 which is the primary teachers training center in GB.

• GB does not have its own curriculum and text book board so it is entirely dependent on NCC at federal level for curriculum and Punjab Text Book board for text books. Close coordination is carried out with both.

Figure 9: Organogram of Education Department Gilgit-Baltistan


• There is no dedicated M&E unit/ section within the Directorate of Education, GB. An officer (Deputy Director) has been given the additional charge of M&E.

• The Gilgit Baltistan Education Strategy states that “at an early stage, government will establish a Monitoring Evaluation and Research MER Unit in DoE to ensure the strengthening of existing monitoring and evaluation systems. At the DoE level quality assurance will be carried out by the establishment of a MER unit to carry out whole-school monitoring and inspection, including monitoring of student achievement, to ensure high standards of education provision. In addition, inspection, supervision and monitoring will be extended to provision of ongoing professional support and mentoring for teachers.

• For data gathering purposes, as a solid basis for effective decision making, EMIS and other existing MER systems will be strengthened as a priority. The MER unit will also

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 73

gather and commission research into education matters as they pertain to Gilgit-Baltistan”. No practical steps on ground have been taken to establish the MER unit as stated in the education strategy

• The EMIS section is capturing school related data, both quantitative and qualitative. It has all school data available from 2010 onwards. The captured data includes student’s enrollment, attendance, teacher’s attendance, class room observation, lesson planning, assessment results sheet of each school, facilities and equipment available in each school.

b. Strengths

• Mostly quantitative and some qualitative data at school level is captured by EMIS.

c. Weaknesses

• The data collection is held once a year so a positive or negative change at school level cannot be documented until the next year.

• No analytical reports are generated through the EMIS data for improving planning and decision making.


• The budgetary allocation for education in GB as a percentage of total GB budget is lowest among all provinces, at around 13% as compared to 19-24% in other provinces

Table 12: Summary of Education Indicators for Gilgit-Baltistan National Gilgit Baltistan

Population Total population (in thousands)

154,794 1058

Population annual growth rate

2.3% 2.56%

Literacy Adult literacy rate 49 (total)

62 (male)

35 (female)

53 (total)

64 (male)

41 (female)

Enrolment and Completion

Primary school net enrolment/attendance ratio

56 (total)

62 (male)

51 (female)

59.1 (total)

58.0 (male)

60.3 (female)

Middle school net enrolment/attendance ratio

60.8% 65.4% 56.2%

High school net enrolment/attendance ratio

47.0% 49.2% 44.9%

% of primary school entrants reaching class5

58 75%

Female students as % of males –primary school

71 (gross) 74 (net) 80.2(gross) 57.4(net)

Female students as % of males –secondary school

73 (gross) Middle 83.5(gross) High 91.4(gross)

Pupil: Teacher Ratio

Primary 34 Middle 24 High 27

Primary 31.8 Middle 24.0 High 21.0

Expenditure on Education as a Percentage of Total

12% of federal budget (2005/06) 2.43% of GDP, possibly increasing to 4% by 2010–11

377.540m (2005/06) 11.1% of Gilgit Baltistan budget Rs 623.922m (2007/08) 13.7% (2007/08)

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 74

Table 13: Estimated Budget for Implementation of GB Education Strategy (2015-2030)

Up to 2010-11

2011 – 2016

2016 – 2021

2021 – 2030

Total

Estimated Total Expenditure (Rs. In Million)

10,179 20,165 30,310 35,349 96,002

Estimated GB Allocation (Rs. In Million)

10,021 17,013 23,862 29,971 80,867

Funding Gap (Rs. In Million)

158 3,152 6,448 5,378 15,135

Funding Gap (US$)

$-2.41(m) $-48.36(m) $-98.89(m) $-82.47(m) $-232.13(m)

8) Focused Group Discussions (FGDs):

Focused group discussions were conducted with 16 teachers (from two government schools) as well as five Head Teachers (from 5 schools including three government and two private schools) in two government schools. The list of participants of these FGDs is attached as Annex- 1 and key findings are as under:

Teachers

• There is no follow up process initiated at the federal or local level to know whether MSQE have been implemented in GB and if not, what the real challenges are?

• AKESP run schools are following their own standards for learners, teachers and school environment.

• Teachers are aware about some basic standards for learners, teachers and school environment. Most of the government teachers acknowledged to have received a hard copy of MSQE by their school while some downloaded the copy from internet and have it on their computers/ smart phones.

• Teachers refer to the MSQE document on need basis. Classroom observation, teaching methodology and student’s assessment are the sections that they refer to the most in the document. By using the standards mentioned in the MSQE document, some teachers have contributed in the development of School Development Plans for their schools.

• For better planning, school census is conducted every year and government school teachers are actively involved in the process. They are required to provide data for their school as per EMIS and M&E template/ questionnaire shared with them. The questionnaire includes data on student’s enrollment, teachers’ attendance, monthly class-room observation checklist, teachers’ performance, Annual Confidential Report of teachers, students’ assessment reports, inventory of school assets.

• Bottlenecks in low performance The factors identified by teachers/ head teachers for low performance are as under: o Opportunities for teachers training are limited. Teachers donot have adequate

number of in-service trainings. Although, Aga Khan University / Professional Development Centre (AKU,PDCN) conducts different trainings for teachers from time to time but these are inadequate.

o Both public and private schools find it difficult to retain good teachers. o Most government primary schools lack Early Childhood Development (ECD)

centers and trained teachers to run such centers.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 75

o Inadequate physical facilities at both private and public schools, especially open areas for sports activities, inadequate laboratories in schools to cater to the student needs and lack of internet connection and libraries are also contributing to low performance.

• The quality of learners in government schools is poor. Most of them are slow learners. Entry test for admission in government schools need to be enforced to have quality intake of learners.

• Continuous assessment (every week) of students is needed across all schools to further improve learning outcomes.

• Parents donot take interest in the education of their children due to illiteracy, their pre-occupation in earning livelihood or doing household chores etc.

• Since GB doesnot have its own Textbook Board so books developed by the Punjab Textbook Board are being taught in government schools of GB which at times doesnot fit into the local context and culture.

Students

• Number of teachers in school are sufficient

• Students are satisfied with the teaching methods and behavior of teachers in the class

• Majority said that corporal punishment was not practiced at their school

• Most of them said the facilities were adequate but a few suggested some addition/ improvements

• Most of them enjoyed cordial relations with their classmate and could interact with teachers easily

4.6 Punjab

The Punjab province has a total of 52,314 public sector schools out of which 52 percentage girls' schools38. 69 percent of these schools in are at primary level. The total numberof enrolled students in public sector schools is 10.8 million. The gender parity index of enrolment is 0.91 (91 girls for every 100 boys). The total number of out of schoolchildren in Punjab stands at 11.4 million; 44 percent of the total population of 5-16 years ‘children39. 51 percent of these out of school children are girls. Punjab has a teaching workforce of 336,628 out of which 50 percent are female teachers. The literacy rate(ages 10 years and above) in the province is 63 percent; in favour of males with 71percent literacy rate compared with 55 percent for females40. Net enrolment rate at primary level (ages 6 to 10 years and including grades 1 to 5) is 73 percent for boys and67 percent for girls. The survival rate to grade 5 is currently 77 percent in Punjab while the effective transition rate from primary to lower secondary stands at 87 percent. 1) Mainstreaming of MSQE at primary and secondary level in Punjab


• 60% of respondents had not seen or read the MSQE document.

38Punjab Annual Schools Census 2015-16 39Academy of Educational Planning and Management (2015). Pakistan Education Statistics 2014-15. Islamabad. 40Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (2016). Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey 2014-15. Islamabad

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 76

• 40% respondents including PCTB, PEC, PDB showed some evidence and knowledge about the MSQE standards and other standards that they have developed or been following in their work.

• Teachers had absolutely no knowledge about various standards under MSQE.

• The representative body of private schools of Pakistan based in Lahore i.e. All Pakistan Private School Federation (APPPSF) representing more than 200,000 private schools in the country was neither consulted in drafting the standards, nor was the MSQE booklet shared with them.

• Most respondents were unaware about the link between MSQE and quality education targets to be achieved under SDG-4.

• Most respondents had no knowledge about Technical Working Group being established and steering the implementation of MSQE in the province as suggested in the MSQE framework.


• QAED which has the mandate of training teachers in the province has developed its own standards for teachers training and has been following that. The MSQE standards were not shared with QAED by MOFEPT or SED.

• Standards for curriculum are being followed by PCTB and for assessment by PEC to a significant extent.

• No evidence could be gathered from APPPSF to know whether standards under MSQE have been adopted by private schools in the province. However, the discussion revealed that the bigger chain of schools follow their own pre-defined standards where curriculum, textbooks, teachers training and school learning environment, all areas of quality are focused

• A new initiative with the title “The New Deal 2018-2023” has been introduced by the Government of Punjab which is still with the provincial cabinet for approval. As per SED, it focuses on quality aspect of education.


• 70% of the respondents are of the opinion that teacher has a major role in low performing schools.

• More than 50% primary schools have single teachers and they are not trained in multi-grade teaching.

• Key issues related to the quality of existing teachers stem from systemic gaps such as a politicized system of recruitment and deployment; irrational teacher educators’ deployment in teacher education institutions; insufficient resources and continuous professional development (CPD) opportunities, and the absence of a robust quality assurance (QA) mechanism.


• 20% of the respondents thought that physical facilities played a key role in enrollment and retention and were the main cause of low performance.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 77


• 10% of the respondents thought the learning environment as whole including parents were responsible for low performance.

3) Implementation of MSQE by Government of Punjab a. Implementation of learners standards

• The focus of learners standards is on provision of basic missing facilities only.

b. Implementation of teachers standards

• Merit in teachers recruitment is being enforced through NTS recruitment.

• SED has taken a crucial step towards teacher certification and licensing directly related to quality education. Punjab Education Standards Development Authority (PESDA) bill has been sent to the provincial cabinet. The rationale behind this policy initiative was to formulate a system that rewards excellent practice, innovation, attracts high achievers to the profession and sustains motivated teachers.

• QAED previously called DSD (Directorate of Staff Development) is an apex institution for in-service and pre-service training of public school’s teachers in Punjab. It is furthering the National Education Policy by focusing on the professional development of public sector’s teacher and equipping them with modern and innovative teaching techniques and methodologies.

• QAED has developed its own standards for teachers training and has been following those. It trains on an average 210-240 teachers per annum nominated by SED. It delivers training relevant to promotions, Punjab Education and English Language Initiative (PEELI) trainings in collaboration with British Council,

c. Implementation of curriculum and textbook standards

• PCTB is the main body in Punjab responsible for curriculum development, publication of textbooks for primary education, secondary, education, intermediate education and teacher’s training courses. It is also responsible for development of supplementary material relating to the textbooks.

• PCTB has been following the MSQE to a significant extent. Previously, it was following the curriculum standards’ set in 2006. PCTB hasintroduced provincial scheme of studies in 2017 covering all subjects from primary to intermediate level based on the standards defined under MSQE.

d. Implementation of assessment standards

• PEC is another key entity in Punjab with reference to implementation of assessment standards. The main functions of PEC are to design, develop, implement, maintain, monitor and evaluate a system of examination for elementary education. In addition, formulate policies and programs for conducting examinations, collect data from research in order to improve curricula and teaching methodology, identify the areas where improvement in training of the teachers or educationists is required.

• PEC’s assessment wing has assessment experts, psychometricians and subject specialists and they regularly refer to these standards while preparing material for assessment.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 78

• All subject specialists are hired on merit and then trained on item writing. The best item writers are placed in a pool and their services utilized from time to time.

• Each item is field tested on 350 students, which is a standard being followed by PEC. Statistical analysis of each item is also carried out before its finalization. Similarly 100,000 papers are tested for marking as a standard.

e. Implementation of school learning environment standards

• In 52,000 schools (around 95%) SED has provided missing facilities like boundary wall, class rooms, furniture, and drinking water at primary and secondary level. Punjab still lacks 117,000 teachers, 171,000 rooms at primary and secondary level.


• No follow up by MOFEPT to see whether the standards have been followed.

• In formulating any plans, mostly non-technical people are representing the Punjab province on behalf of the technical bodies.

• The TWG at provincial level seems dysfunctional. Nobody knows who its members are and how many times it has met and where.

• No data on standards followed in private schools is being collected. SED is also monitoring the private schools but in the absence of relevant laws it cannot interfere much in their operations. The ‘Private Education Regularity Authority Act’ has been prepared and it is with the provincial assembly for further legislation.

b. Finances

• None of the respondents pointed out to any funding gap/ constraint.

c. Coordination

• Coordination between MoFEPT and key entities under the provincial education department is very weak. One respondent commented that “Before devolution, the coordination between federal and provincial departments/ entities was strong and more frequent”

• A few respondents commented that “Even in rare cases where there are coordination meetings between federal and provincial stakeholders, the province is represented by non-technical people which does not produce any results”

• Coordination between provincial level entities like PCTB, SED, PEC and QAED is need based only.

• QAED has never asked APPPSF for nominating private teachers for training.

d. Processes

• After dissemination of standards, MoFEPT should have carried out orientation sessions or trainings of key stakeholders in the provinces. This did not happen and resultantly, the implementation has been slack.

• There is staff shortage in key departments of the province. For example, in PCTB the sanctioned posts are 414 while 170 are vacant. 41 This shortage is hindering the process of curriculum and textbook development, in accordance with the standards.

41https://pctb.punjab.gov.pk/system/files/Detail%20of%20Posts.pdf

https://pctb.punjab.gov.pk/system/files/Detail%20of%20Posts.pdf

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 79

• High staff turnover in the education department is a major bottleneck for continuity of plans. Most respondents interviewed were found to be working on their existing position since the last 3-12 months, therefore their institutional memory of developments that had taken place prior to 2018 was missing.

e. Structural Bottlenecks

Structural bottlenecks are analyzed in the light of the organizational structures operating within the school education department, Government of Punjab. It is important to mention that organizations affiliated with school education department have an important role to play with particular reference to enhancing the quality of education. Therefore, it is useful to discuss their role within the overall structure of the school education in connection to quality of education.

Figure 10: Communication and Coordination in Punjab




Generally, instructions are generated from the provincial level and directed down to the division and then to the districts, where district level officers implement the same through their Tehsil and Markaz level staff. Normally such information is passed as it is and that no necessary explanation is annexed to that. Therefore, sometimes, the lower structures find it difficult to implement the same and obtain desired results. Further, the implementation takes place to obey the orders instead of getting the real idea and improve things.

District Level

Divisional Level

Provincial Level


Provincial Level Provincial Education Secretariat

PESP/ PMIU

DMO

Secretariat

DPI Elementary

CEO (Edu)

DPI Secondary

PCTB QAED PEC PEF

Punjab Curriculum & Textbook Board (PCTB): Curriculum & textbooks Quaid-e-Azam Academy for Education Development (QAED): Trainings

Punjab Examination Commission (PEC): Examination Weak coordination on quality enhancement among these institutions

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 80


Upward flow generally happens in response to the orders/ circulars coming from the secretariat or the office of the DPIs. It has been observed and confirmed through discussions that there is no trend of informing the higher authorities with necessary information, success or failure stories.

Horizontal Flow

Horizontal flow generally happens within the affiliated organizations responsible for various functions especially those related to quality. For instance, Quaid-e-Azam Academy for Educational Development (QAED), an organization responsible for quality through capacity building/ trainings) never coordinates with the PEC, which is responsible for assessment/ examination for grades 5 and 8. In fact, these two organizations must build a functional liaison that is supposed to provide assessment findings of all regions and all subjects so as the trainers and module designers could develop training modules accordingly. For example, if southern Punjab districts have performed poor in mathematics of grade 5, and central Punjab grade 5 students have shown poor results in English subject; these regions must receive trainings in the subjects they were unable to produce better results.

Similarly, QAED’s instructions are passed to their district staff who have weak coordination with the district education administration. In addition, organizational reforms in QAED has also hampered quality delivery and coordination challenges.

At the same time, Monitoring and Evaluation Assistants (MEAs) designated by PMIU/ office of the DMO to obtain quantitative information have never been in coordination with district administration and QAED’s district staff for exchange of views that may help in making good decisions for quality.

In addition, Punjab Curriculum & Textbook Board (PCTB), which is responsible for curriculum and textbooks, have hardly coordinated to conduct research and obtain feedback through QAED or through any other organization. They should carry out research on regular basis through these organizations to obtain feedback on improving the quality of textbooks and adapt the curriculum as per needs.

5) Impact of education departments internal systems and coordination on implementation of MSQE The coordination between SED, PCTB, PEC and PMIU has improved the education statistics in the province, some of them directly related to quality.

Figure 11: Allied institutions of SED Punjab

SED Punjab

PCTB

Curriculum development and publication of textbooks for Primary, Secondary, Intermediate Education,

Teacher’s Training Courses

PMIU-PESRP

Monitoring wing of SED. Schools monitoring and reporting .

Maintaining relatime school monitoring data

PEC

Design, develop, implement,maintain, monitor and evaluate a

system of examination for elementary education.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 81

• Between 2013-2018, availability of water, clean drinking water, toilet, electricity, and boundary walls, were some of the areas in which an over 90% improvement was observed in all primary and middle schools.42

• The number of children enrolled in primary schools has jumped from 4.96 million in 2013 to 5.46 million in 2017 with recent data indicating the number to 6 million

• Students’ attendance has increased from 80% to 92%.

• A similar pattern was seen in the attendance of teachers, which increased to an overall 95%.

6) Monitoring mechanism

a. Available mechanism

• Program Monitoring and Implementation Unit (PMIU) acts as the monitoring wing of SED. The following monitoring indicators have been introduced by SED in all schools from 1st January 2019: 1. Attendance of students 2. Retention of students 3. Attendance of teachers 4. Existence of boundary wall (height of wall shall be 8 ft. on all sides including 2 ft.

razor wire) 5. Availability of toilets as per enrollment figures (criteria of 2 toilets per 100

students, 4 toilets for 101-250 students, 6 toilets for 250-500 students, functionality of washrooms to be checked,

6. Availability of clean drinking water 7. Availability of adequate number of furniture 8. Health and hygiene (focusing on school cleanliness, toilet cleanliness, availability

of soap, cleanliness of classrooms, building, ground) 9. Literacy Numeracy Drive-LND test (10 students of class 3 will be tested in English,

Urdu and Maths) 10. Redressal of complaints registered on hotline 11. Utilization of funds received by school under NSB 12. Data health (verification by PMIU of data collected by MEAs with school entered

data)

• These indicators are being monitored through 942 MEAs/ school monitorsin 36 districts which act as the eyes and ears of SED and PMIU. The MEAs are mostly retired army personnel.

• The MEAs collect all their data through tabs provided by SED along with pictures and transmit the data online to PMIU.

b. Strengths

• Realtime data on all indicators and all schools is available on the PMIU website for quick and efficient decision making https://open.punjab.gov.pk/schools/

• The reports submitted by MEAs for each school and the LND results are available online at http://sedinfo.net/check-lnd-test-results-online/

42AlifAilan Report

https://open.punjab.gov.pk/schools/

http://sedinfo.net/check-lnd-test-results-online/

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 82

c. Weaknesses

• The bias of MEAs against a particular school/ staff can affect the data collected.

• There is no check on the MEA’s in the field.


• The overall budget allocation for the education sector in Punjab has been increasing every year during the last five years. Although a major chunk of the education budget is allocated to current expenditures like salaries, the non-salary and development budget has also seen proportionate increase over the years, which is an indication that government wants to continue its focus on teachers training, improving assessment, curriculum and text books development and providing missing facilities, all contributing to quality education.

• The budgetary allocation for education in Punjab has two heads, i.e. current and development. The recurrent education budget entails the budget allocated for ongoing expenses that occur on a daily basis. Also called the operational budget, this budget includes two types of expenses, i.e. salary and non-salary




year wise budget allocation under the current and development heads.

Table 14: Punjab Education Budget Allocation 2013-18

PunjabEducation Budget Allocation (Rs. in Billion) Total Provincial


Percentage of Total


Current


2013-14 182 (78%) 18 (8%) 32 (14%) 232 897 26%

2014-15 199 (77%) 22 (8%) 39 (15%) 260 1,095 24%

2015-16 210 (74%) 33 (11%) 44 (15%) 287 1,447 20%

2016-17 211 (72%) 22 (7%) 63 (21%) 296 1,681 18%

2017-18 - - - 345 1,971 18%

• There has been a steady increase in the total education budget for Punjab. The total education budget for Punjab was Rs. 232 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 345 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 49% in five years. The Punjab education budget as a percentage of the total budget remained between 18-26% throughout these five years, the highest being 26% in 2013-14 and lowest being 18% in 2016-17 and 2017-18.


• Major portion of the recurrent budget is absorbed in salaries and related expenditure. The salary budget for education has increased by 16% during the five years, however as

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 83

a percentage of total education budget it has been on a decline. The non-salary budget has increased by 22% during the five years In the Punjab education budget.

• It is worth noting that the increase in percentage share of education has been significantly steep in case of development budget. The share of development budget for education has increased from 14 percent of the total budget in2013-14 to 21 percent in 2016-17.

• For teachers training, a total budget of Rs. 4.8 billion was apportioned in the education budget in 2016-17. Out of the total teacher training budget, Rs. 3.6 billion (75 percent) was earmarked for in-service teacher training while 25 percent of the budget (Rs. 1.2 billion) was allocated for pre-service teacher training in 2016-17.

• A total budget of Rs. 20 billion was earmarked for Programme Monitoring and Implementation Unit (PMIU). This showed a decline of Rs. 125 million compared with the allocated budget for PMIU in the previous year. The salary budget of PMIU decreased from Rs. 365 million in 2015-16 to Rs. 240 million in 2016-17.

• To assess and examine learning achievements of students in the province, particularly grade 5 and grade 8 students, a budget of Rs. 1 billion was allocated for Punjab Examination Commission (PEC) in 2016-17; highlighting an increase of 10 percent compared with the allocated budget of Rs. 908 million in 2015-16.

• A budget of Rs. 8 billion was earmarked in 2016-17 for reconstruction of dangerous school buildings. This budget slightly declined from the allocated budget of Rs. 8.5 billion in 2015-16.



year wise education expenditure under the current and development heads in Punjab.

Table 15: Punjab Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18

Punjab Education Budget Expenditure (Rs. in Billion) Overspending/ Underspending (Rs. In billion) Year

Current


2013-14 168 (79%) 15 (7%) 29 (14%) 212 (-20)

2014-15 174 (82%) 21 (10%) 18 (8%) 213 (-47)

2015-16 192 (78%) 28 (11%) 25 (11%) 245 (-42)

2016-17 - - - 261 (-35)

2017-18 - - - 341 (-4)

• Like increase in allocation, the expenditure on education in Punjab also increased over the last five years. The total education expenditure for Punjab was Rs.212 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 341 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 61% in five years.

• For all five years the education budget was under-utilized.


4.7 Sindh

Sindh has a total of 45,447 public sector schools out of which 15 percent are girls' schools while 62 percent are mixed schools43. 91 percent of these schools in are at primary level.

43Sindh Education Management Information System data 2015-16

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 84

The total number of enrolled students in public sector schools is 4.1 million. The gender parity index of enrolment is 0.65 (65 girls for every 100 boys). The total number of out of school children in Sindh stands at 6.7 million; 56 percent of the total population of 5-16 years' children44. 52 percent of these out of school children are girls. Sindh has a teaching workforce of 156,216 out of which 32 percent are female teachers. The literacy rate (ages 10 years and above) in the province is 60 percent; in favour of males with 70 percent literacy rate compared with 49 percent for females45. Net enrolment rate at primary level (ages 6 to 10 years and including grades 1 to 5) is 67 percent for boys and 54 percent for girls. The survival rate to grade 5 is currently 59 percent in Sindh while the effective transition rate from primary to lower secondary stands at 66 percent. THEMES

1) Mainstreaming of MSQE at primary and secondary level in Sindh

a. Knowledge about MSQE in public and private education system/ departments

• Most of the persons interviewed in Sindh had knowledge about the MSQE and they shared that they participated in consultative sessions held for the development of these standards. They also shared that they had seen the standards in printed form.

• However, almost half of the participants were aware of the “Sindh School Education Standards and Curriculum act 2014”, which was initiated by the SELD as part of their reforms’ efforts for quality enhancement in Sindh school education. It is apprised that the Government of Sindh enacted “Sindh School Education Standards and Curriculum act 2014” in 2014 and are on way to implement the same.

• Curriculum wing, DCAR and STEDA are among the allied institutions of the SELD who showed significant knowledge about the MSQE and “Sindh School Education Standards and Curriculum act 2014”.

• On the other hand, it is important to note that the “Sindh School Education Standards and Curriculum Act 2014” defines “curriculum” and related initiatives thoroughly, whereas “standards” could not capture adequate attention in the act.

• During an interview with SCDP (Sindh Capacity Development Project) of the USAID, it was noted that a consultant has been hired to develop standards for Sindh quality education. According to the notes, a few meetings have already been held in this connection where MSQE were reviewed thoroughly and suggestions were received to contextualize the same for Sindh.

• Most of the respondents were able to connect MSQE, quality education and SDG-4.

• Private schools’ representatives were virtually unaware of the standards and other quality initiatives that have been initiated by the SELD in Sindh.

• Private schools’ representatives also had very little idea about SDG-4.

44Academy of Educational Planning and Management (2015). Pakistan Education Statistics 2014-15 45Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (2016). Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey 2014-15

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 85


• STEDA has developed standards and rubrics at their own for the accreditation of Initial Teacher Education (ITE) that is termed as early childhood education. STEDA has completed one cycle of accreditation of ITE institutions, which indicates that at least one institution in Sindh has implemented education standards in true spirit.

• DCAR has adopted the MSQE, especially those relating to standards for curriculum, textbooks and learners. The DCAR and PITE representatives were able to categorically link the MSQE and the standards (standard operating procedures) that they had already developed for curriculum, textbook and learners. Regarding standards for learners, the DCAR and curriculum wing respondents were confident in saying that “as they had adopted the national curriculum 2006, therefore the defined learning standards serve as standards for learners for us in Sindh”.

• In a bid to implement the curriculum and standards, the SELD through its curriculum wing, Sindh Textbook Board, PITE and DCAR, are developing state of the art textbooks that meets 21st century targets through learner friendly interactive teaching & learning materials. It is evident that SELD is heading fast to achieve the quality standards in Sindh.

• SELD is also keen in addressing the issue of missing facilities by adhering to the standards mentioned under physical facilities. It is important to note that basic facilities such as electricity, boundary wall, drinking water, toilets, furniture and additional classrooms are being targeted on priority basis as part of their efforts to enhance enrollment and retention. Although most of the persons interviewed were not able to connect this effort directly with quality aspect.

• School Specific Budget (SSB) was an initiative that was implemented by the SELD to primary, elementary, high and higher secondary schools. This is a non-salary budget to run schools in an efficient manner and is based on level, size and enrollment of school. The SSB is given under the heads of stationery, co-curricular activities (sports items), instructional materials; library/laboratory items, furniture and travelling allowance. According to the SELD statistics spending rates are as under:

•

Table 16: Utilization of Budget in Sindh

Financial year Total SSB (Rs. Million)

Release to Schools (Rs. Million)

Utilization

2011-12 3,486.0 629.595.0 514.75

2012-13 3,486.0 Nil Nil

2013-14 3,764.0 3,764.0 35.22

2014-15 4,000.0 4,000.0 Nil

2015-16 4,684.0 4,684.0 1,019.0

2016-17 4,684.0 2,342.0 145.0

554.557.0 (Re-appropriation to R&M)

112.412

2017-18 4,488.0 1st quarter Under processes

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 86

• Regardless of some challenges with releases and utilization, it was positive to note that school based empowerment initiative was made in SELD.

• Establishment of directorate general for M&E in SELD to ensure transparency and accountability is yet another wonderful initiative by the SELD to ensure implementation of standards at school level. So far two indicators are being prioritized and monitored through designated staff members under the M&E directorate, i.e. teachers’ and learners’ attendance. The DG M&E is also taking care of the complaints mechanism that is effective since a couple of years.


• All the respondents interviewed shared that teachers are the most critical factor in school performance. The curriculum wing in particular with a few other representatives of the allied institutions of SELD, therefore, informed about a few initiatives that SELD has taken to address teacher quality. a few of the a listed under:

o DG M&E is regularly monitoring attendance of the teacher to ensure that teacher is present in the school and classroom

o School specific budget is another initiative that empowers teachers and connect him/ her with school more closely

o New recruitment policy and decision to provide extensive in-service training after recruitment exhibits positive intention of the department to address the issues of the teachers.

o Adequate increase in salary is also a motivating factor o Continuous professional development (CPD) model developed and

approved by the SELD will also empower teachers professionally

• Although Sindh Government has tried its best to come close to the standard STR (Student Teacher Ratio) yet, teachers are a constant challenge in terms of their capacity to manage students and teach them in an enabling environment. STR is fairly good at all levels; 29:1 primary, 25:1 elementary and 25:1 secondary. Nevertheless, teachers’ presence has been an alarming challenge that SELD is trying to deal with.

• Despite a good STR, there are many schools in urban and semi-urban areas where STR is not good. In such schools one teacher is managing a class of more than 50 learners, which restricts the quality of teaching & learning in the classrooms. “Teachers can only discipline these learners, teaching is far away”, said one of the respondents. Even, one of the teachers commented that, “How can I teach and give individual attention to over 50 children in 30 minutes class”.

• In addition, teachers’ ability to master the content knowledge and their ability to teach well through interactive and enabling teaching techniques is a primary cause of low performance in schools in Sindh. Most of the respondents accepted a fact that teachers’ mastery of content is poor and they are keen to build professional capacities of the teachers

• During an interview with M&E person, a specific line was further discussed i.e. “system is captured by insiders and other special interest groups that prefer the

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 87

status quo”. During discussion, it was revealed that the insiders may also be teachers who are part of the teachers’ unions and are not ready to accept additional work that requires them to address quality in the classrooms. This special interest group has captured the system and are continuously damaging the children’s future.


• Nearly half of the respondents agreed to the fact that physical facilities are a cause of low performance. During discussions with the respondents, the term performance was discussed thoroughly, and they claimed that the performance of the school is not just learning outcomes, the performance also denotes higher enrollment, lesser drop out and performance of the teachers as well. They maintained that physical facilities have a crucial connection with enrollment, retention and drop-out of the learners. Schools with high level physical facilities manage to attract both parents and learners, whereas schools with less physical facilities are unable to convince parents to send their children to these schools.

• The respondents discussed that the term basic facilities should be redefined and the standards relating to basic facilities for both government and private schools must be reviewed as well.

• Teachers in particular were of the view that physical facilities are important for school performance and helps in mobilizing the community for higher enrollment targets.


• School environment as a whole and classroom environment as a specific entity were discussed during the interviews. High level officials and school teachers confirmed that school/ class environment is critical in school performance.

• Most of the respondents, especially those who were of the view that school environment is crucial, shared that it is a combination of both teachers and physical facilities. Teachers’ capacity and availability of physical facilities are basic factors to formulate school environment. Therefore, it is one of the most critical factors in school performance.

Priority analysis of these factors

Low performance factors were prioritized by respondents in two ways; 1) single factor priority analysis, 2) multiple factors priority analysis. Results are given under:

Figure 12: Single factor priority analysis Figure 13: Multiple factor priority analysis

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 88

3) Implementation of MSQE by Government of Sindh

Implementation of MSQE and standards developed by the SELD is interpreted as under:

Standards for Teachers:

Standards for teachers were discussed most by various respondents. The respondents informed that the standards for teachers were in fact developed back in 2007 by the then Ministry of Education (MoE), Policy and Planning Wing, Islamabad which was restructured after 18th amendment and was renamed as Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training (MoFEPT). However, the standards for teachers were included in MSQE as it is. PITE Sindh and STEDA representatives categorically confirmed that they have not only adopted but have implemented the same in different ways. PITE has referred these standards and have updated their training manuals. They have also referred these standards and developed CPD model. In an interview with the Directorate of Literacy & NFE, the respondent verified that they have used these standards in developing their standards for NFE facilitators. The standards for NFE facilitators are seven in number and have been contextualized for Sindh. These standards were approved by STEDA.

Furthermore, the STEDA representative shared that they have developed standards for Initial Teacher Education (ITE) accreditation by using the standards for teachers. Now STEDA is accrediting ITE institutes by using tools and guidelines derived from these standards.

It is worthwhile to mention that although these institutions have implemented these standards, but there was no standards management/ implementation system. They have just referred these standards to develop their own. STEDA is also keen to use these standards in developing licensing system for teachers in Sindh.

75

15

10

Single factor role in school performance (percentage)

Teachers

Physical Facilities

School Environment

6025

15

Multiple factor role in school performance

Teacher & Py. Fac. (1&2)

Teacher & Sc.Env. (1&3)

Phy Fac. & Sc Env. (2&3)

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 89

Standards for Learners and Assessment:

Standards for learners were implemented by DCAR in assessment and examination of grade 5 and grade 8. The DCAR representative responded that the national curriculum 2006 was adopted as it is by the Sindh Government and that learning standards defined in the national curriculum act as standards for learners. During discussion, it was revealed that the standards for learners were not being implemented in full as textbooks are also a source to develop bank of test items and question papers. At the same time, it is equally important to discuss that how examination boards are implementing the standards for learners. The examinations boards in Sindh have not declared precisely that they are using student learning outcomes (SLOs) to develop test item bank and question papers, as they are still using textbooks to develop test items and question papers.

It is also important to note that the Sindh Government has not institutionalized its assessment and examination system as Punjab and Balochistan did through Punjab Examination Commission (PEC) and Balochistan Education Assessment Commission (BEAC). Although Sindh has developed its “Policy for Assessment and Examination” and also has a “Sindh Education Students Learning Outcomes Framework (SESLOAF)”, but both are merely pieces of paper and that there is no institution to implement both of these policies and framework. The Sindh Examination Commission (SEC) was discussed to be institutionalized, but there is no progress so far in this connection.

At the same time, the directorate of Literacy & NFE (SELD) has positively used the accelerated education curriculum for primary level and has developed Framework for Assessment & Examination for NFE in Sindh.

Therefore, it can be safely concluded that implementation of standards for learners and assessment are partially implemented in Sindh. Formative assessment practices were never found anywhere in the province except in Sindh Education Foundation (SEF), who claims to implement the same in SEF schools partially. The SEF has also designated staff members for assessment who are expert in this field and implements the formative assessment.

Standards for School Learning Environment:

School learning environment standards were primarily discussed with EMIS, M&E and schools. The EMIS and M&E verified that most of the physical elements of the school learning environment are included in their tools/ questionnaires that are administered annually and on monthly basis respectively by EMIS and M&E directorate. However, psychosocial elements such as peaceful & safe environments, teachers’ irrational behavior, school policies and inclusive environment as well as service delivery that deals with basic health services are not implemented in true spirit. The DG M&E appears to be keen in including a few elements of psychosocial and service delivery aspects in their tools in future. The CPD model also elaborates a few elements of these aspects are also mentioned, but that too, is awaited to be implemented in true spirit.

Standards for Curriculum

Standards for curriculum are well defined and DCAR is custodian of these standards. The DCAR claims that they have been carefully adhering to the curriculum standards. The DCAR Director verified that they implemented these standards while developing accelerated

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 90

education curriculum for primary level, which was developed by the Directorate of Literacy & NFE with technical assistance of JICA.

Standards for Textbooks

In developing textbooks, Sindh Textbook Board and DCAR have the leading role with extensive support from PITE. Standards for textbook development under MSQE and SOPs developed by the STBB earlier, steer the textbook development process. The curriculum wing, which is responsible for quality education in Sindh, also claims to adhere to these standards while developing new textbooks in Sindh. The STBB and other institutions shared that they have recently developed textbooks and guides for teachers under Accelerated Education Programme and that all these standards were adhered to in developing, reviewing, improving and approving the textbooks. Engagement of subject specialists, processed and principles to follow were derived directly from these standards.

Bottlenecks in Implementation of Standards

Generally, the implementation of standards is carried out through a comprehensive “standards management/ implementation system” that opens up the standards, categorizes its levels such as inputs, processes and outputs. The system defines the institutions that are custodian of a particular set of standards, and that how the standards should be implemented in true spirit. For example, the implementation system narrates that the standards for teachers must be used to develop rubrics, tools and guidelines, which will further be used to accredit / or award license to individual teachers. Similarly, this process will be repeated every three or five years to make sure that teachers’ quality is up to the mark/ standards. At the same time, standards for teachers should also be used by the training institutions where they would make sure that the training modules translate each and every standard. Also, the pre-service education institutions must also use the standards to develop curricula, contents and systems of teacher education programmes.

Although, evidences show that most of the standards were found to be partially implemented in Sindh, however, there was no standards management/ implementation system behind that. Therefore, the implementation of standards in Sindh may be categorized as ad-hoc.

The standards implementation is also discussed under certain themes:

a. Plans

• There was no plan found or witnessed in any department/ section or unit that described the implementation of any set of standards.

• There was not a single post found in the SELD that was designated fully or partially for standards implementation.

• However, there were plans to improve physical infrastructure as part of the provision of missing facilities, upgrading school infrastructure and teachers’ recruitment.

• There was also a plan that defined that pre-service teacher education which is no more required in recruitment policy, as SELD will ensure professional development through in-service education and training.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 91

• There were some plans and policies that were developed but they all were queued awaiting implementation. Therefore, it can be safely concluded that plans were adequate but their implementation was seriously lacking.

a. Finances

• As there was no position, person or plan found directly that was held responsible to implement the standards, therefore, it is assumed that the standards implementation in Sindh could not get adequate funds.

• However, finances were available for plans developed for physical infrastructure, teachers’ recruitment, training and M&E.

b. Coordination

• Serious disconnect was observed among various allied institutions of the SELD.

• Sometimes, within one institution of the SELD, different positions had different information about the same matter. For example, knowledge about adoption of MSQE varied from person to person. Some informed that MSQE were officially adopted and some responded in negative. However, there was no official declaration in this connection.

• Relatively weak coordination was observed among DCAR, Textbook Board and PITE, which are key institutions for curricula, textbooks, and training of teachers. In fact all these three elements are inter-connected, but there was no any systematic way of coordination among these three institutions.

• Coordination with federal education ministry was also ad-hoc and extremely weak. It was on need basis and always required a funded meeting. However, Sindh positively participated in Inter-provincial education ministers’ conference (IPEMC) which is no more functional after the change of political Government.

• After 18th amendment, Sindh province could have exhibited a good spirit of sharing learning by coordinating with federal and provincial institutions, but it has lacked in this area.

c. Communication

• Communication with various institutions of the SELD was found to be weak and non-systematic.

• Official correspondence protocols appeared to be the communication bottleneck, which needs to be eased out through ICT/ emails and mobile applications. There are many officers that still rely on postal correspondence from one room to the other room, which appears to be a waste of time.

• Communication from top tiers to the lowest tiers is also cumbersome and takes time to reach down to the school level.

• Communication to the relevant actors is also inadequate and sometime misses an institution that has specialized capacity in a particular field. This happens with both public and private/ development sector entities.

• Communication with federal education ministry is also extremely slow. Most of the circulars or notifications are not well elaborated such as the circular with MSQE was unclear. That expected provinces to do most of the things at their own, without defining even the basic things.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 92

d. Processes

• Process that defines a smooth transition from planning, to execution and then using the same for improvement is missing in standards implementation and quality parameters of education.

• There was virtually no process observed in implementation of standards in Sindh as the standards management/ implementation system was absent. However, those standards such as teachers, physical infrastructure, curriculum and textbooks that gathered enough evidence of being implemented, were implemented as they had clear linkage with quality. The processes were ad-hoc and non-scientific and always required a person to push things for implementation.

• The processes for quality implementation were also not very reliable as all the relevant institutions were not part of the process of any particular quality initiative. For example, school monitoring does not capture enough indicators, hence unable to communicate to the relevant institution. In fact ongoing school monitoring processes must inform the PITE, DCAR and textbook board to incorporate feedback in curricula, textbooks and training system.

e. Structural Bottlenecks

In Sindh, the structural bottlenecks are analyzed in the light of the vertical and horizontal structures of the School Education and Literacy Department (SELD), Government of Sindh.

Figure 14: Communication and Coordination in Sindh

District Level

Divisional Level

Provincial Level


Provincial Level SELD Secretariat

RSUSecretariat

e

DPI Elementary

DEO

DPI Secondary

STEDA DCAR PITE SEF STBB

Sindh Teachers Education &Development Authority (STEDA): standards, pre & in-service education/ trainings

Directorate of Curriculum, Assessment & Research (DCAR): curriculum, research and assessment

Provincial Institute for Teacher Education (PITE): trainings/ capacity building Sindh Education Foundation (SEF): alternative education programmes, private schools

Weak coordination among these organizations on quality aspect

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 93

Vertical communication



Generally, instructions are generated from the provincial level and directed down to the division and then to the districts, where district education officers implement the same through their Taluka and field level staff. All types of directives/ circulars are sent by the secretariat to the district offices copying divisional offices for implementation.


In response to the directives/ circulars coming from the top are responded immediately by the lower offices. There is no trend of providing any information other than required or asked by the superior office. On the other hand, the lower level offices must have their own system to collect feedback and provide to the main office or relevant organization responsible for quality or standards.

Horizontal Flow

Analysis of the horizontal flow or coordination among affiliated organizations is extremely important to see the initiatives taken for quality enhancement. In Sindh, the only occasion where all these organizations are gathered is when there is extraordinary situation or some donor agency organizes a meeting on some specific agenda. Otherwise, these organizations hardly gather and share their views that help in improving the quality of education.

During interviews, it was revealed that even STEDA and PITE, which are responsible for a similar kind of work have no mechanism to share their views and improve things.

Similarly, there is no assessment & examination system for grades 5 and 8 as in Punjab, so the assessment findings are not officially shared with any other organization. However, the district level administration conducts examination for grades 5 and 8 with the technical supervision of DCAR. STEDA and PITE have never consulted with such assessment results nor has the DCAR disseminated such findings with STEDA or PITE.

In Sindh, there is no quality education clusters and staff designated for this purpose, so the routine monitoring is not robust as in Punjab. However, field officers and monitoring officers may take some responsibility to measure quality indicators and provide the feedback to STEDA, DCAR and PITE as well as STBB.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 94


Impact of education department’s internal system is discussed by analyzing the SELD’s organogram / administrative structure in the light of the discussion held with respondents:

Figure 15: Organogram of SELD

The organogram of the SELD is heavily administrative in nature and that there is no position at these levels that describes standards or quality. The only position found here in this structure is of the Deputy Secretary Curriculum that deals with one of the allied institutions that is “Curriculum Wing” established under “Sindh School Education Curriculum and Standards Act 2014”. In response to a question about the technical positions pertaining to quality and/ or standards, the respondents shared that the quality and standards area is managed through allied institutions that operate under the Secretary SELD.

Figure 16: Allied Institutions of SELD

In allied institutions, there are several institutions that manage the quality functions in Sindh Education. STEDA, Curriculum Wing, DCAR, PITE and examination boards are among the 10 institutions that manage educational quality function varyingly. The Curriculum wing that was established under the act has initiated certain reforms about the curriculum and textbooks jointly with RSU. Similarly, DCAR that required to be restructured and operated

Secretary

SELD

Special Secretary (Schools)

Additional Secretary Schools I

Deputy Secretary Schools I

Additional Secretary Schools II

Deputy Secretary Schools II

Additional Secretary Schools III

Deputy Secretary Schools III

Special Secretary

(Law)

Additional Secretary Law

Deputy Secretary Law

Special Secretary

(A&T)

Additional Secretary

(A&T)

DS (A&T I)

DS (A&T II)

DS (Curriculum)


(Endowment)


(GA/C)

DS (GA/C)

Additional Secretary PDF

DS (B&F)

DS Development

DS Planning

Allied Institutions

Secretary SELD

Directorate of

Schools

Management of schools through

provincial, divisionl and district set up

RSU

Reforms Support Unit,

management of free textbooks,

teacher management,

SAT, school based budgets

STEDA

Sindh Teacher Education

Development Authority, standards, teachers’ training/ capacity building

DG

M&E

Ensuring transparency

through monitring & evaluation.

Curriculum Wing

Implementation of standards

and curriculum act 2014.

DCAR

Directorate of Curriculum,

Assessment & Research

PITE

Teacher education, and

training

PPP Node

Public private partnership,

procurement of quality services for education

services delivery

Examination Boards

5 education boards in Sindh

to manage examinations of grades 9, 10, 11

& 12

Dirrectorate of Literacy & NFE

To enhance literacy rate and

address the crises of out of school children

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 95

under the curriculum wing as per the act, awaits adequate financial and technical support under institutional strengthening. The DCAR, though, has been restructured, but it lacks adequate staff with specialize expertise on assessment, research and curricula. The DCAR could not initiate a proper research on textbook development or standards for textbooks or curricula.

Similarly, PITE has started to dysfunction to an extent after the establishment of STEDA owing to clear demarcation of functions of both institutions. Furthermore, Sindh Government’s policy decision to recruit teachers without pre-service education has put a question mark on PITE, whereas CPD model is yet to be unpacked and connected to PITE as an additional or primary responsibility.

In addition, examinations for grade 5 and 8 are still under the directorate of schools whereas district education department is primarily responsible for holding these examinations. Such an arrangement has already raised numerous questions on the quality of the examinations itself, while Sindh Examination Commission (SEC) is yet to be operationalized or institutionalized. The existing examination system has never provided feedback to PITE or DCAR for teachers’ professional development.

Although the administrative system in SELD adequately addresses the education quality through various positions and designated functions, but the weak coordination and lack of expert staff and financial resources, the SELD is unable to fully control and manage the educational quality aspect in Sindh. Prevailing disconnects, weak staff capacity and lack of innovative initiatives has restricted the efforts in addressing the quality of education in Sindh.

5) Monitoring Mechanism a. Available Mechanism

Available mechanism for monitoring in Sindh (SELD) was established in January 2015 under World Bank’s Technical Assistance. A full-fledged Directorate for M&E under the leadership of a senior Director General (DG) was established with modern technology-based monitoring system of school teachers’ attendance and overall school system. It covers basic profiling of schools, evidence-based information about school HR and infrastructure to prioritize the issues and upgrade school infrastructure. The M&E directorate general claims that it has controlled teachers’ absenteeism and has involved local stakeholders by establishing the District Reforms Oversight Committees (DROC) at district levels. Through Sindh School Monitoring System (SSMS), indicators pertaining to teachers’ performance primarily through their attendance, teachers’ attendance have increased in Sindh.

In addition, conventional district level education department under DEO (district education officer) operates to monitor the schools on regular basis. The Assistant district education officers (ADEOs) regularly visit the schools and report accordingly to the DEO.

At the same time, SEMIS (Sindh Education Management Information System) collects basic school information, teachers’ profiles and infrastructure and community members related information on annual basis. This data helps in developing annual

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 96

statistical reports which are used to make policy decisions of allocating school specific budgets and other decisions such as upgradation of schools and rationalization of teachers.

b. Strengths

• The Sindh School Monitoring System (SSMS) has now been upgraded as real time school monitoring that is an android based application to monitor school services especially attendee of learners and teachers. The SSMS has the capacity to operate with more indicators which are being included gradually.

• The monitoring system also has complaints mechanism that allows users to make complaints against the schools. Complaints receiving, analysis and reports are being generated on timely basis and that the decision makers are making policy and operational decisions on the basis of complaints.

c. Weaknesses

• Indicators that are being monitored are less in number, whereas using the same system, many more indicators relating to school performance can be included, monitored and improved. The system has to be used to its optimum capacity.

• Coordination with district education department appears to be weak and in contradiction at times.

• Reporting of SSMS appears to be weak at the moment. However, the M&E directorate is keen to disseminate the reports more widely.

• The SSMS is operating under technical assistance (TA) and requires to be scaled up under regular budget. The SSMS may also be linked closely with district education department to address efficiency issues and economy factor.


• The overall budget allocation for the education sector in Sindh has been increasing every year during the last five years. Although a major chunk of the education budget is allocated to current expenditures like salaries, the non-salary and development budget has also seen proportionate increase over the years, which is an indication that government wants to continue its focus on teachers training, improving assessment, curriculum and text books development and providing missing facilities, all contributing to quality education.

• The budgetary allocation for education in Sindh has two heads, i.e. current and development. The recurrent education budget entails the budget allocated for ongoing expenses that occur on a daily basis. Also called the operational budget, this budget includes two types of expenses, i.e. salary and non-salary



DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 97

Table 17: Sindh Education Budget Allocation 2013-18

SindhEducation Budget Allocation (Rs. in Billion) Total Provincial


Percentage of Total


Current


2013-14 94 (70%) 24 (18%) 17 (12%) 135 617 22%

2014-15 99 (72%) 28 (20%) 11 (8%) 138 686 20%

2015-16 104 (70%) 31 (21%) 13 (9%) 148 739 20%

2016-17 114 (65%) 44 (25%) 18 (10%) 176 869 20%

2017-18 - - - 202 1,043 19%

• There has been a steady increase in the total education budget for Sindh. The total education budget for Sindh was Rs. 135 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 202 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 50% in five years. The Sindh education budget as a percentage of the total budget remained between 19-22% throughout these five years, the highest being 22% in 2013-14 and lowest being 19% in 2017-18.


• Major portion of the recurrent budget is absorbed in salaries and related expenditure. The salary budget for education has increased by 21% during the five years, however as a percentage of total education budget it has been on a decline. The non-salary budget has increased by 83% during the five years In the Punjab education budget.

• The share of development budget for education has remained steady at around 10% of the total education budget during the five years.

• The Government of Sindh earmarked a budget of Rs. 1.72 billion for teacher training in 2016-17, registering a decrease of 3 percent compared with the allocated budget in 2015-16. Out of the total teacher training budget for 2016-17, Rs. 919 million (53 percent) was earmarked for pre-service teacher training while 47 percent of the budget (Rs. 799 million) was allocated for in-service teacher training.

• A budget of Rs. 200 million was earmarked for Standardized Assessment Test (SAT) in 2016-17, showing no increase compared with previous year's allocation. For learning assessments under Provincial Education Assessment Centre (PEACE), a budget of Rs. 66 million was earmarked in 2016-17. The same budget was apportioned for PEACE in 2015-16.

• In 2016-17, a budget of Rs. 2 billion was allocated for provision of free textbooks to students. This showed an increase of 15 percent (Rs. 260 million) compared with the apportioned budget for free textbooks in 2015-16.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 98

The table below (source: Public Financing of Education in Pakistan 2010-11 to 2016-17, Institute of Social and Policy Sciences and Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19) shows the year wise education expenditure under the current and development heads in Sindh.

Table 18: Sindh Education Budget Expenditure 2013-18

Sindh Education Budget Expenditure (Rs. in Billion) Overspending/ Underspending (Rs. In billion) Year

Current


2013-14 87 (83%) 12 (11%) 6 (6%) 105 (-30)

2014-15 90 (83%) 12 (11%) 7 (6%) 109 (-29)

2015-16 102 (76%) 23 (17%) 10 (7%) 135 (-13)

2016-17 - - - 147 (-29)

2017-18 - - - 166 (-36)

• Like increase in allocation, the expenditure on education in Sindh also increased over the last five years. The total education expenditure for Sindh was Rs.105 billion in 2013-14 which increased to Rs. 166 billion in 2017-18, an increase of 58% in five years.

• For all five years the education budget was under-utilized. The average underutilized amount comes to Rs. 27 billion per year. This reflects systemic weaknesses in budget estimation, delayed releases against budget allocations and capacity issues within the Department of Education.


DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 99

5. RECOMMENDATIONS

To address the bottlenecks identified during the study, the following actions/ measures are recommended:

Actions/ Measures for Achieving Quality Education

Increase in education budget

• The budgetary allocation to education sector has remained static around 2 % of GDP for the past decade, with a big chunk (about 92%) being spent on recurrent heads mainly salaries, leaving a small amount (about 8%) as development budget for quality enhancement such as provision of school facilities, teachers’ training, curriculum development, monitoring and supervision of education.

• Substantial increase in education sector budget is required: from present 2.2% of GDP to 4% of GDP at national level and minimum allocation of 25% total budget of provinces/areas to reach the target in four years. This would entail capacity building at the provincial and district level so that funds can be properly utilized and are not lapsed or allocated to other sectors.

• According to “Report of the Committee on Education Sector Reforms in Pakistan, Federal Ombudsman’s Secretariat, Islamabad (2018)” the existing and required budget as a percentage of the total budget, to meet the quality education targets by 2030 is presented below:

Table 19: Budget (Existing and Required)

Provinces/Area 2016-17 2021-22 2025-26 2030

Punjab 18.50% NIL 22% 25%

Sindh NIL NIL 23% 24%

KPK 119 B 215 B 30% 32%

Balochistan 17% NIL 22% 25%

ICT 7.06 B 11.68 B 19.81 B 32.58 B

GB 20% 22% 24% 26%

AJK 26% 28% 29% 30%

• This is also an important opportunity to address the challenge of budgeting, particularly in the areas which do not receive National Finance Commission awards like GB and AJK. The seventh NFC award has allotted 82.98% of financial grants to four provinces. Under the new formula, approximately 51.74% of revenue shares were directed to Punjab; 24.55% to Sindh; 14.62% to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa; and 9.09% to Balochistan Province; all shares were distributed based upon their performances.

Induction and training of teachers

• The 60% single teacher schools in the country may not be able to meet even the basic teaching and learning standards, as long as the number of teachers is not rationalized. The student-teacher ratio must be brought down through accelerated induction through NTS and training for improved learning outcomes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khyber_Pakhtunkhwa

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 100

• According to “Report of the Committee on Education Sector Reforms in Pakistan, Federal Ombudsman’s Secretariat, Islamabad (2018)” the existing and required number of teachers to meet the quality education targets by 2030 is presented below:

Table 20: Teachers (Existing and Required)

Provinces/Area 2016-17 2021-22 2025-26 2030

Punjab 343,458 414,000 496,800 606,096

Sindh 150,787 183,283 233,920 298,548

KPK 104,726 142,522 174,918 214,956

Balochistan 45,663 61,663 66,303 73,919

ICT 6,500 NIL NIL NIL

GB 7,363 7,813 82,933 8,804

AJK 28,500 28,500 28,500 28,500

• More teachers would reduce the pupil-teacher ratio (PTR) and pupils will have a better chance of contact with the teachers and hence a better teaching‐learning process. Currently, the average national PTR for pre-primary level is 19, primary is 32, middle is 21 and upper secondary is 23. It needs to be brought down significantly to around 15 .

• Emphasis should be given to the improvement of contents of training courses for enhancing teaching skills.

• Federal and Provincial Ministries of Education in collaboration with Directorate of Trainings should make teacher guides and other open educational resources available on-line for teachers through a portal like https://elearn.gov.pk/

• Multi grade teaching is a reality, especially in rural area schools. There is hardly any arrangement for training of teachers in this mode. Directorate of Teacher Education in Federal, Provincial and Areas should develop modules on multi-grade teaching for teachers involved in multi-grade teaching.

• Teachers need to be trained and equipped with latest teaching techniques on regular basis. It needs to be ensured that teachers go and work in remote areas for teaching duty. Incentive to teachers be provided in the shape of promotions related to their performance.

Improving data collection and management

• Monitoring and evaluation is led by the Academy of Educational Planning & Management and integrated with provincial/ area networks extending to district levels. While substantial data is collected through education management information systems and other means, there is a need to finetune indicators, coordinate with other bodies, and draw on household surveys.

• The M&E and EMIS staff needs refresher trainings. M&E, EMIS and general monitoring / follow up tools (questionnaires) must be reviewed immediately and aligned with MSQE. For example, indicators relating to teachers monitoring/ follow up inside the class must be derived from teachers’ standards. Similarly, indicators of school facilities must be aligned with standards for school learning environment. The M&E and EMIS section should also collect data on private schools on the same parameters. Feedback system to collect data, review and analyze the data coming through these tools and then reporting must be on regular basis. Sharing of reports with concerned individuals/ offices should

https://elearn.gov.pk/

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 101

also be a regular feature followed by a final monitoring that would denote an analysis of actions taken on the basis of data.

Accelerate provision of missing facilities

• The provincial/ area governments are spending huge amounts every year on provision of missing facilities in government schools. But still many schools are left out due to funding constraints.

• The CSR activities of big corporate companies, private entrepreneur firms and individuals should be encouraged and given incentives to adopt schools for infrastructure development and provision of necessary facilities. The incentives could be in the shape of tax rebates or attribution of schools to the sponsors.

• Public-private partnership for running government schools should also be explored.

Construction of new schools and classrooms

• New formal schools need to be constructed on urgent basis to improve access, particularly for girls.

• However, for optimum utilization of available infrastructure, double shifts should also be introduced in all schools where sufficient number of students are available. Additional teachers and staff should be recruited with corresponding budget allocation.

• Additional classrooms need to be constructed in schools where pupil-classroom ratio (PCR) is high. PCR is an important indicator to measure the quality of education at a particular level of education. A low PCR is often perceived good. This means as enough classrooms are available and less number of students in a classroom which facilitates teachers to focus more on the needs of individual students, thus reducing the amount of class time they spend dealing with disruptions. The average national PCR for primary level is 38, middle is 33 and upper secondary is 43.

• In Balochistan there is a general trend to open schools in the areas where population is less and the land is free of cost. This trend should be arrested and new schools should be allowed to be opened on priority in more populous towns. The relevant criterion needs to be revisited.

• Under the housing laws, each housing society is under obligation to earmark amenity plots for community service but usually most of these plots are leased out to private elite schools. It is recommended that directions may be issued to the housing societies to give these plots at subsidized rates for the establishment of Government schools.

Target out of school children

• Intensify enrollment campaigns by involving parents, community elders, prayer leaders etc.

• Involve National Commission for Human Development (NCHD) and Basic Education Community School (BECS) for promoting literacy and enrolling out of school children.

• Enhance funding support to these two organizations.

Involving parents and communities

• School Education Departments through head teachers and teachers should increase contact with parents and make them realize the value of education in improving the lives of their children

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 102

• Schools should initiate campaigns to familiarize parents regarding: children's learning needs and parents' role in supporting them, nutritional and hygiene needs of their children, giving attention to their children at home to complete their class assignment and visiting regularly their school.

• School Management Committees should be revitalized and civil society members be involved apart from school administration & parents.

Retaining qualified teachers

• Majority of the teachers have B.A./M.A. and B.Ed/M.Ed degrees which is higher qualification than what is required for recruitment in primary or elementary schools. These teachers join teaching profession because of high un-employability in the country but they rarely take it as their destination and keep seeking for better jobs.

• Education departments at Federal and Provincial level should work on grades, pay scales and career paths for teachers to retain these highly qualified teachers in schools.

• Although all induction in education department in most provinces is now being carried out through NTS test, a system like teacher certification and licensing as proposed in Punjab, that rewards excellent practice, innovation, attracts high achievers to the profession and sustains motivated teachers, needs to be developed and implemented in all provinces/ areas.

Retaining students

• School Education Department may arrange financial support program for poor students to improve student retention, especially girls' retention in schools.

Focus on school leadership

• School Education Departments in provinces and areas should introduce a separate cadre of head teachers with separate recruitment criteria, service structure and career path to provide visionary leadership for school improvement in primary schools, permanent designation of head teachers can improve leadership in primary schools.

Market and job-oriented education

• In order to prepare the students for gainful employment opportunities, the Government should introduce skill-based education having avenues for profitable employment in coordination with TEVTA and NAVTEC. The schools should be upgraded accordingly with the facilities for such education and training.

Improving reading habits

• Federal and Provincial School Education Departments should establish and strengthen school libraries in schools and manage dedicated time for reading books in school timetable to develop reading habits in students.

Involve private schools

• As per Pakistan Education Statistics 2016-17, private educational institutions are serving sizeable number of students (36%). While acknowledging the contribution of private schools in imparting education to large number of school going children, the

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 103

Government should bind private schools to rationalize the fee structure and to enroll at least 10% children belonging to poor families.

Improving coordination and efficiency

• The government communication system needs to be eased out through ICT/ emails and mobile applications for quick sharing of information and decision making.

• The assessment & examination related organizations (which vary in each province/area) should carry out assessment for grade 5 and 8 and develop analytical reports that should depict geographical and subject wise assessment reports to inform policy, curricula, textbooks, and training & education programs in the province.

• At the same time organizations responsible for curricula, textbooks, in-service training and pre-service education must use the assessment findings and improve these areas. This can only happen through objective coordination among these organizations to enhance the quality of education in the provinces. This may be initiated by setting standards for teachers, learning environment, learners, textbooks and curricula followed by a comprehensive standards management system, which would allow to set up an operational feedback system.

• The following figure explains the ideal relationship among these organizations.

Figure 17: Ideal relationship among organizations

Actions/ Measures for Promoting and Implementing MSQEE

▪ MSQE needs to be further promoted among the provinces/ areas and disseminated horizontally and vertically through a vigorous campaign led by MOFEPT.

▪ The campaign may require printing and distribution of additional copies of MSQE and carrying out orientation sessions for key government education department/ institution staff and private school representatives in each province/ area.

▪ The provincial/ area SDG Support Units can play a role through close liaison with the respective education departments and allied institutions within their province/ area to facilitate the distribution of copies and orientation sessions since these have a direct impact on achieving the SDG-4 targets.

▪ The participants of orientation sessions should be sensitized about the importance of quality education and need for adoption of quality standards to achieve SDG-4 targets.

Assessment organizations

•Carry out assessments and conclude findings

•Inform the policy, curricula, training and pre-service education programs

Curricula & textbook board organizations

•Should use assessment findings to improve curricula

•Should imprpve textbooks

•Should set up mechanims of feedback to collect regular feedback

In-service Training organizations

•Should use findings and improved curricula and textbooks to tailor and improve training contents

•Use the same findings for CPD system

Pre-service education organizations

•The new curricula, trainign contents to be used to improve teacher education programmes for quality teachers

•New pre-service education programs to be designed on need basis for NFE

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 104

▪ All provincial/ area education departments should keep a record of copies received/ sent along with copy of notification with each booklet and establish a system of acknowledgement from the receiving entity.

▪ All provincial/area education departments and their allied institutions should be instructed by MOFEPT and through Secretary Education to put the soft copy of MSQE on the main pages of their official websites or facebook pages for easy reference.

▪ The soft copies of the MSQE document should also be shared in various social media forums/ networks like WhatsApp, Twitter used by department staff/allied institutions/ teachers. This would ensure easy access to the standards.

▪ The MSQE booklet needs to be translated into Urdu and disseminated widely. The language used in the document is difficult to understand for most teachers and education staff at provincial level.

▪ Colored panaflex posters on quality standards in Urdu should be printed by respective government education department/ institutions and provided to middle, high and higher secondary schools for pasting at prominent places in government schools to increase awareness about these standards among students, teachers and PTC members.

• A series of consultative workshops are needed at federal and provincial/ area level to devise an implementation framework for each province/ area as per their priorities and context. The Technical Working Group (TWG) needs to be made functional.

• The framework with clearly defined indicators should translate into an Action Plan with yearly targets, activities and means of verification.

• The provincial and federal level private schools’ regulatory authorities/ private school federations should be involved in the entire process.

• The implementation framework must include commitments from the provincial/ area government for establishing a dedicated Quality Standards Unit in their respective province/ area with required technical staff and financial resources for implementation of the framework and monitoring its progress.

• Although after the 18th amendment, implementation of quality education is the domain of provincial government but MOFEPT must continue to play the anchor role in steering provinces towards quality education.

• The MOFEPT needs to take a lead on formation/restructuring of TWG in each province and empowering it to develop an action plan for implementation of MSQE.

• It should be made mandatory for TWG to meet in every quarter and share the minutes with MOFEPT as well as IPEMC.

• Exchange meetings between TWGs should be encouraged for experience sharing and lessons learnt.

• A robust monitoring mechanism needs to be developed at the federal level to coordinate with the provincial/ area Quality Standards Units for monitoring the action plans on quarterly basis.

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 105

6. ANNEXES

Annex 1: List of Respondents of FGDs

PARTICIPANTS OF FOCUSED GROUP DISCUSSION (LEARNERS)

School Name: Government Shaheed Hasnain Sharif Higher Secondary School for Boys

Location: GT Road, Peshawar City, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Principal Name: Mr. Mati ullah

Contact Details: 091-2551039 Email: [email protected]

Grade 10- Section A

S No. Student Name Father’s Name

1. Fareed Ahmad Habib Hazrat

2. M. Shafiq Banair Khan

3. Noor Afzal Zahir Shah

4. Sher Ali Dad Muhammad

5. M. Hilal M. Bilal

6. Saddam Hussain Inayat-ur-Rehman

7. M. Shahzaib M. Sher

8. M. Talha Yahya

9. Adil Jamil Jamil Ahmad

10. Shahzad Khan Abdul Waheed Khan


School Name: Government Boys Model High School

Location: Aliabad Hunza, Gilgit-Baltistan

Principal Name: Mr. Muhammad Ismail

Contact Details: 05813 960809

Grade 8

S

No.

Student Name Age (yrs) Father’s Name

1. Nouman 13 Ali Sifat

2. Kamran 14 Karim

3. Awais 13 Sher Alam

4. Yawar Abbas 13 Rajab Ali

5. Ahmed Raza 15 Ghulam Raza

6. Sabir Hussain 16 Nazar Hussain

7. Mueez Uddin 14 Khushahmed -Din

8. Raees Khan 16 Sher Khan

9. Izhar Ullah Baig 15 Nisar Ullah Baig

10. Rahmat Ali 13 Barkat Ali

mailto:[email protected]

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 106


School Name: Government Boys Model High School


Principal Name: Mr. Muhammad Ismail (Head Master)

Contact Details: 05813-960809

Grade: 5

S

No.


1 Ahmed 9 Majeed

2. Sajid 7 Abid

3. Rahman 7 Mehrban

4. Eraj (Female) 8 Moladad

5. Shakeela

(Female)

8 Adil

6. Ruhi (Female) 8 Qayoom

7. Adiba (Female) 7 Shaib Khan

8. Ammar 8 Ikram Uddin

9. Alishan 7 Ismail

10. Sayam 8 Bul Hassan


School Name: Government Girls High School


Principal Name: Mr. Amin Khan (Vice Principal)

Contact Details: 0581 3960808/ 0355 5550808/ 0344 9493699

Grade 8

S

No.


1. DolatJabeen 15 Abdul Karim

2. Uzma 13 Gul Hassan

3. AlisuBano 16 Bulbul Jan

4. Rina Parveen 15 Sahib Khan

5. Komreen Iqbal 14 Iqbal Karim

6. Falak Hakeem 14 Abdul Hakeem

7. FarheenSherdil 13 Sherdil Khan

8. Talat Jabeen 14 Khan Gulwai

9. Aryana Bano 15 Nizam Uddin

10. AlimaRozi 15 Piyer Ali

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 107




Principal Name: Mr. Amin Khan (Vice Principal)

Contact Details: 0581 3960808/ 0355 5550808/ 0344 9493699

Grade 5

S

No.


1. Mahnoor 7 Sartaj Karim

2. Sharifa 7 Alam Khan

3. Amal 7 Deedar Karim

4. Ruzina 8 Muhammad Ishaq

5. Shahida Shah 7 Nowbahar

6. Assina 7 Javeed

7. Shumila 7 Sultan

8. Alina 9 Shah Jahan

9. Anika 8 Musa Khan

10. Khushnodi 7 Babar Khan

PARTICIPANTS OF FOCUSED GROUP DISCUSSION (TEACHERS)

School Name: Government Shaheed Hasnain Sharif Higher Secondary School for Boys

Location: GT Road, Peshawar City, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Principal Name: Mr. Mati ullah

Contact Details: 091-2551039 Email: [email protected]

S No. Teachers Name Subjects Taught Joined School Contact No.

1. M. Kamran Biology & Chemistry 2017 0333 9277712

2. Rashid Hussain English & Computer 1999 0311 1905787

3. S.M. Dawud Health & Physical Education 2017 0321 9003307

4. Kiramatullah English 2015 0333 9120607

5. M. Ayaz Chemistry & General Science 2019 0346 9193073

6. Wajid Ali Biology & Chemistry 2016 0313 4711258


DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 108



Location: Danyore, Gilgit

Principal Name: Nelofar Karim


S No.

Teachers Name Subjects Taught Teaching Experience

Contact No.

1. Azra Batool English , Elementary Science 20 years 0315 5906652

2. Nisht Pervez English, Mathematics 8 years 0310 5969079

3. Shamsul Nahar Urdu, Islamiyat, Social Studies 13 years 0355 5121033

4. SuriyaBano Education, Mathematics, 10 years 0345 2854785

5. FoziaBano Primary Urdu ,Islamiyat 8 years 0341 8895670

6. Rubina Shaheen Biology & Chemistry 12 years 0345 2858754

7. Alveena Hameed Biology & Chemistry 3.5 years 0316 8537582

8. Nelofar Shah English, Education 9 years 0310 5244183

9. Ambreen Chemistry 9 years 0316 9292514


School Name: Government Boys High School

Location: Danyore, Gilgit

Principal Name: Muhammad Sharif


S No.

Teachers Name Subjects Taught Teaching Experience

Contact No.

1. Muhammad Raza Social Studies, Education 32 years 0314 4472741

2. Sakhi Ahmed Jan Urdu, Civics, Agriculture 28 years 0355 5174414

3. Islam Ud Din General Science, Urdu 28 years 0344 8851047

4. Muhammad Ali Jinnah General Science, Islamiyat

15 years 0355 5250927

5. Muhammad Ibrahim Chemistry 8 years 0355 4126167

6. Muhammad Aslam English, Mathematics 6 years 0346 9233507

7. Noor Shah Urdu 2 years 0347 2418877

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 109

INTERVIEWS WITH HEAD TEACHERS/ PRINCIPALS

S No.

Head Teacher/Principal Name

School Province/Area Contact No.

1. Mr. Matiullah, Principal

Government Shaheed Hasnain Sharif Higher Secondary School for Boys, GT Road, Peshawar City

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

091-2551039

2. Ms. Riffat Ali, Senior Head Mistress

Government Fatima Girls High School, 2 Fane Road, Lahore

Punjab N/A

3. Ms. AmnaTabassum, Head Mistress

City District Government Primary School, ChowkSafanwala, Mozang, Lahore

Punjab N/A

4. Mr. Muhammad Shareef, Head Teacher

Government Boys High School, Danyore, Gilgit

GB 03554187713

5. Ms. Nelofar Karim, Head Teacher

Government Girls High School, Danyore, Gilgit

GB 0355 5551452

6. Ms. Shama Miraj, Head Teacher

Government Girls High School, Main Babar Road ,Kashrote, Gilgit

GB 05811-960643

7. Mr. Naib Khan, Head Teacher

Aga Khan Education Service DJ Model Secondary School Danyore, Near Baig Market Danyore, Gilgit

GB 05811-456028

8. Mr. Farman Karm, Head Teacher

The Academy of Excellence Naveed Shaheed Road Zulfiqarabad, Gilgit

GB 05811- 459533

9. Mr. Muhammad Asim, Head Teacher

Government Boys Primary School Naluchi, Muzaffarabad

AJK 0344 1914510

10. Ms. AbidaKousar, Head Mistress

Government Girls Higher Secondary School Lower Chatter, Muzaffarabad

AJK 05822-960805 0306 561096

11. Mr. Asghar Ali Abbasi, Principal

Government Boys Model High School Upper Chatter, Muzaffarabad

AJK 05822-960806

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 110

Annex 2: Details of Respondents (Interviews)

Respondents from Federal/ ICT

No Name Designation Department Contact Details

1. Mr. Rafique Tahir

Joint Education Advisor (JEA)

Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training (MoFEPT), Government of Pakistan

Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training , Islamabad, C Block, Pak Secretariat, Islamabad Phone: 051-9103915 Email: [email protected] [email protected]

2. Mr. Yasir Irfan Deputy Chief Development


Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training , Islamabad, C Block, Pak Secretariat, Islamabad Phone: 051-9203007, 9205433

3. Mr. Yasser Arafat Chatha

Deputy Director, Quality Enhancement Cell, Federal Directorate of Education (FDE)


Federal Directorate of Education (FDE) Rohtas Road, G-9/4, Islamabad Phone: 051-9261899

4. Mr. Dawood Shah

Director, Academy of Educational Planning and Management (AEPAM)


Academy of Educational Planning and Management (AEPAM), Taleemi Chowk, G-8/1 Islamabad-44000 Phone: 051-926-0674 Email: [email protected]

5. Ms. Zahra Habib Mr. Saad Ahmed Mir

Assistant Education Advisor, National Curriculum Council (NCC) Admin & Accounts Officer


Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training , Islamabad, C Block, Pak Secretariat, Islamabad Phone: 051-9203007, 9205433 Email: [email protected] Cell (Saad): 0332-5759305

6. Mr. Shafqat Janjua Mr. Ahmed Hussain Khwaja

Director Education, National Commission for Human Development (NCHD) Assistant Director, Education


National Commission for Human Development 14th Floor, Shaheed-e-Millat Secretariat Jinnah Avenue, Islamabad Phone: 92-51-9216200 Cell (Ahmed): 0332-2821627 Email: [email protected]

7. Mr. Imtiaz Alam

Education Specialist

UNESCO Imtiaz Alam Cell: 0333-5084323

8. Mr. Imtiaz Ali Qureshi Mr. Waqas ul Hassan

Chairman Assistant Research Officer

Private Educational Institutions Regulatory Authority (PEIRA)

Private Educational Institutions Regulatory Authority (PEIRA), Al Farabi Special Education Complex, Opposite NORI Hospital, Hanna Road, Sector G-8/4, Islamabad Chairman 051-9107701 Email: [email protected] Member (Academics) 051-9107703 Phone (Waqas): 051-9107746 Email: [email protected]

mailto:Email:%20%[email protected]







DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 111

Respondents from Punjab


1. Mr. Qaiser Rashid

Additional Secretary (Budget & Planning)

School Education Department (SED), Govt. of Punjab

School Education Department (SED), Government of Punjab, Old Planning and Development (P&D) Building Civil Secretariat, Lahore Phone 042- 99212014 (PA Shahid) Cell 0321-4035568 Email: [email protected]

2. Mr. Ubaidullah Khokhar

Additional Director General, Quaid-e-Azam Academy for Educational Development (QAED)


Quaid-e-Azam Academy for Educational Development (QAED), Punjab Wahdat Colony, Wahdat Road, Lahore Phone 042-99260108 Email:[email protected]

3. Dr. Nasir Mr. Qammer Sajjad

Assessment Expert Deputy Director (IT/ Coordination, Implementation and Communication) Punjab Examination Commission (PEC)


Punjab Examination Commission (PEC) Link Wahdat Road, Near Pilot Boys High School, Asif Block Allama Iqbal Town, Lahore, Punjab Phone: 042-99260150 9260153 Email: [email protected] Qammer Cell 0322-4543204 Phone: 042-99260156 Email: [email protected]

4. Mr. Karam Hussain

Deputy Director, Punjab Curriculum and Textbook Board (PCTB)


Punjab Curriculum & Textbook Board (PCTB) 21-E-II, Gulberg-III, Lahore Phone 042-99230672-76 Cell 0331-4736917 Email: [email protected]

5. Ms. Tania Malik District Monitoring Officer (DMO) Lahore


Deputy Commissioners Office, Lahore Cell 0300-4826999 Email: [email protected]

6. Ms. Saba Adil Ms. Narmeen Adeel Mr. Umar

Additional Programme Director, PMIU-PESRP Head of Research, PMIU-PESRP M&E Specialist, PMIU-PESRP


Programme Monitoring and Implementation Unit (PMIU)-Punjab Education Sector Reform Programme (PESRP) 8A, Ali Block, New Garden Town, Lahore Phone: 042-99232293 Email: [email protected] Cell (Saba): 0303-4019706 Saba Email: [email protected] Narmeen Email: [email protected] Umar Cell: 0300-8831912

7. Mr. Kashif Ali Mirza

President

All Pakistan Private Schools Federation (APPSF)

All Pakistan Private Schools Federation (APPSF) 93-K, Gulberg III, Lahore Phone: 042-35757787 35773457 Cell: 0300-9416389 Email: [email protected]











DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 112


8. Mr. Muhammad Parvez Akhtar

EDO Education Lahore


School Education Department (SED), Government of Punjab, Old Planning and Development (P&D) Building Civil Secretariat, Lahore Phone: 042-99203369 Cell: 0300-4273446

9. Amjad Hussain Section Officer School Education Department (SED), Govt. of Punjab

School Education Department (SED), Government of Punjab, Old Planning and Development (P&D) Building Civil Secretariat, Lahore Phone: 042-99214258 Cell:0311-7779737 Email: [email protected]

10. Mr. Azhar Ali Khan Rana

Chief -Education Planning & Development Board, Government of Punjab

Planning & Development Board, Civil Secretariat Church Road, Lahore Phone: 042-992142 Cell: 0321-7122626 Email: [email protected]



DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 113

Respondents from Sindh


1. Mr. Qamar Shahid

Director General, Provincial Institute for Teacher Education (PITE)

Sindh Education and Literacy Department (SELD)

Sakranj Road, Nawabshah Cell: 0317 3001367

2. Dr. Fouzia Khan Director, Curriculum Wing


School Education Department (SED) Head Office 1st. Floor, Tughlaq House, Sindh Secretariat, Saddar Karachi Cell: 0321-9200520 Email: [email protected]

3. Mr. Bilal Lashari

Sr. Programme Officer

Sindh Education Foundation (SEF)

SEF, 21-A, Block 7/8, Overseas Cooperative Housing Society (OCHS), Ameer Khusro Road, Karachi Cell: 0346 8218844

4. Mr. Abdul Majeed Bhurt

Executive Director, Sindh Teacher Education Development Authority (STEDA)


Sindh Teacher Education Development Authority (STEDA) Bunglow No. 308, Street 16, Bahadurabad, Karachi Phone 021-99333321-3 Email: [email protected] Cell: 0300-3034761

5. Mr. Mohammad Asghar Memon

Director, Directorate of Curriculum, Assessment & Research Sindh (DCAR)


Directorate of Curriculum, Assessment & Research Sindh (DCAR), Jamshoro Phone 022-9213406 022-771179 Email: [email protected] Cell: 0300 2548927

6. Mr. Agha Sohail Ahmed

Chairman, Sindh Textbook Board (STBB)


Sindh Textbook Board (STBB) Head Office Sindh University, Allama I. I Kazi Campus, Jamshoro Phone 022-9213442 022-9213414

7. Mr. Muhammad AlamThaheem

Director, Literacy & NFE


3rd Floor, Old KDA Building, Secretariat# 03, Sindh Secretariat, Karachi Cell: 0302-3183501 Email: [email protected]

8. Mr. Naveed Sheikh

Chief of Party, Sindh Capacity Development Project (SCDP) funded by USAID

USAID 2nd floor, Cavish Court, A-35, Block 7 & 8, KCHSU Shara-e-Faisal, Karachi Cell: 0321 2024744

9. Mr. Pir Ghulam Muhiuddin Shah

District Education Officer (DEO) Hyderabad


Cell: 0333 7033047





DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 114

Respondents from Balochistan


1. Mr. Sher Ahmed Sulamani

Deputy Director Secondary Education Department (SED), Govt. of Balochistan

Directorate of Education (Schools) Secondary Education Department (SED), Govt. of Balochistan Shawak Shah Road, Quetta Phone: 081-9202102

2. Mr. Hanif Bangalzai

Incharge EMIS, Policy, Planning and Implementation Unit (PPIU)

Secondary Education Department (SED), Govt. of Balochistan

Policy, Planning and Implementation Unit (PPIU), Civil Secretariat, Quetta

3. Mr. Abdul Khaliq

Focal Point, Policy, Planning and Implementation Unit (PPIU)


Policy, Planning and Implementation Unit (PPIU), Civil Secretariat, Quetta Abdul Khaliq Cell: 0333 7822870 Email: [email protected]

4. Mr. NiamatullahKakar

Director, Bureau of Curriculum (BOC)


Directorate of Education (Schools) Shawak Shah Road, Quetta Cell: 0300-9383995

5. Mr. Mohammad Ijaz

Director, Provincial Institute of Teacher Education (PITE)


PITE Office, Gulshan-e-Islam Colony, Near Tariq Hospital, Sariab Road, Quetta Cell : 0334 2373032

6. Mr. Arif Shah CEO, Balochistan Education Assessment Commission (BEAC)


Balochistan Education Assessment Commission (BEAC) Directorate of Education Shawak Shah Road, Quetta Phone. 081-9203750

7. Mr. Sharif Haider

Director, Literacy & NFE

Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Balochistan

Social Welfare/ Special Education Complex, Brewery Road, Quetta Cell: 0322 2497415

8. Mr. Yahya Baloch Chairman, Balochistan Textbook Board (BTBB)


Balochistan Textbook Board (BTBB) Gulshan-e-Islam Colony, Near Tariq Hospital, Sariab Road, Quetta Phone 081-2470501 2470503 Email: [email protected]

9. Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Pandrani

President, All Balochistan Progressive Private Schools Association (ABPPSA)

N/A All Balochistan Progressive Private Schools Association (ABPPSA) 214 Second Floor, Universal Complex, M.A. Jinnah Road, Quetta



DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 115

Respondents from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP)


1. Mr. Abdul Basit

Additional Secretary (Development)

Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED), Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED) Block A, Opposite MPA’s Hostel, Civil Secretariat, Peshawar Phone: 091-9210049

2. Mr. Mohammad Imran Kazim

Sr. Planning Officer


Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED) Block A, Opposite MPA’s Hostel, Civil Secretariat, Peshawar Phone: 091-9223539 Cell: 0300-5892122 Email: [email protected]

3. Mr. Altaf Hussain Mr. Salah ud din

Head Education Management Information System (EMIS) Deputy Director EMIS/ Project Manager IT


Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED) Block A, Opposite MPA’s Hostel, Civil Secretariat, Peshawar Phone: 091-9214092 Cell (Salahuddin): 0300-5939748 Email: [email protected]

4. Mr. Atta Ullah Jan

Chief Audit Officer Directorate of Elementary & Secondary Education, Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Directorate of Elementary & Secondary Education, GT Road Firdous Bazar, Near Government Higher Secondary School No. 1, Peshawar Cell: 0335-9717107 Email: [email protected]

5. Mr. Hakim Ullah

Director, Provincial Institute for Teacher Education (PITE)


Provincial Institute for Teacher Education (PITE) Charsadda Road, LandaySarak behind Benazir Women University Peshawar Phone: 091-9224783 Cell No of PA (Rauf Khan) : 0333-9726070

6. Mr. Saeed ur Rehman

Member, Editorial and Publications, KP Textbook Board (KPTBB)


Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Textbook Board (KPTBB) Phase V, Hayatabad Peshawar Phone: 091-9217889 Email: [email protected]

7. Mr. Kamran Iftikhar Lone Mr. Osama Saeed

Deputy Team Lead Teaching and Learning -ASI Independent Monitoring Unit (IMU) Advisor

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Education Sector Programme (KESP) funded by DFID

Adam Smith International (ASI) Business Enclave, PC Hotel Peshawar Cell: 0345 5858428 Email: [email protected] [email protected]

8. Mr. Idrees Azam

District Education Officer (DEO), Peshawar


DEO Office, Elementary & Secondary Education Department (E&SED), Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, GT Road Opposite KP Chamber of Commerce, Peshawar Phone: 091-9225458

9. Mr. Computer District Delivery Unit Directorate of Elementary




http://www.kpese.gov.pk/ConPITE.html

http://www.kpese.gov.pk/ConPITE.html





DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 116


Mohammad Saleem Khan Mr. Pazir Zada

Programmer (DDU), Directorate of Elementary & Secondary Education, Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

&Secondary Education, GT Road Firdous Bazar, Near Government Higher Secondary School No. 1, Peshawar Cell: 0336 5265020 (Saleem), 0301-5880986 (Pazir) Email:[email protected] [email protected]

10. Mr. Zulfiqar Khan

Additional Director Curriclulum, DCTE


Directorate of Curriculum and Teacher Education (DCTE), College Road, Mandian, Abbottabad Phone: 0992-382634& 0992- 384278 Cell (Gohar): 0314-9615266 Email [email protected] Cell (Zulfiqar): 0344-9446036 Email (Zulfiqar): [email protected]

11. Mr. Sardar Asad Haroon Ms. Neelum

Managing Director Director Admin

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Private Schools Regulatory Authority (KPPSRA), Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Private Schools Regulatory Authority (KPPSRA), House # 6 D-IV, Park Avenue, near Zakia Minhas Hospital, University Town, Peshawar Phone: 091-5700246 Email: [email protected] PSO to MD (Inam) Cell: 0304-818836






DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 117

Respondents from AJ&K


1. Mr. Syed Saleem Gardezi

Additional Secretary (Schools)

Directorate of Public Instructions Elementary and Secondary Education, AJK

Elementary & Secondary Education, Near AJ&K Legislative Assembly, Block# 1st floor Chatter Muzaffarabad Phone:05822-960826 Cell#: 0301-5676404 Email: [email protected]

2. Mr. Zahoor Ahmed Khan

Director EMIS Directorate of Public Instructions Elementary and Secondary Education, AJK

Elementary & Secondary Education, L Block 2nd Floor, old Secretariat Muzaffarabad Phone: 05822-960021 Cell#: 0300-8333930 Email: [email protected]

3. Mr. Syed Muhammad Arshad Kazmi

Director Budget and Accounts


Elementary & Secondary Education, L Block old Secretariat Muzaffarabad Phone: 05822-960028 Cell#: 0344-9510103 Email: [email protected]

4. Mr. Muhammad Khursheed Khan

Chairperson AJK Textbook Board Block # 5, 3rd floor, New Secretariat Chattar, Muzaffarabad Phone: 05822-924185 Cell#: 0344-5052823 Email:[email protected]

5. Dr. Maqbool Tahir

Director General Directorate of Curriculum Research and Development

Elementary & Secondary Education, L Block old Secretariat Muzaffarabad Phone: 05822-960019 Cell#:0334-5014415 Email: [email protected]

6. Mr. Amjad Iqbal Awan Ms. Fozia Khan

i.DEO Education MaleMuzaffarabad ii. DEO Education Female Muzaffarabad


Elementary & Secondary Education, L Block Ground Floor, old Secretariat Muzaffarabad Phone:05822-960010 Elementary & Secondary Education, L Block Ground Floor, old Secretariat Muzaffarabad Phone: 05822-920033 Cell#:0346-5044851

7. Mr. Khawaja Tariq Shafi

Coordinator Kashmir Education Assessment System

Block # 5, 3rd floor, New Secretariat Chattar Muzaffarabad Phone:05822-960804 Cell: 0300-5544364 Email Address:[email protected]

8. Prof. Syed Ejaz Gillani

Chairman AJK Private School Association Representative

Muzaffarabad Public School & College Near Saheli Sarkar Bridge Muzaffarabad Phone: 05822-442653 Cell: 0321-517523 Email:[email protected]

9. Mr. Muhammad Asim

Head Teacher, Govt. Primary School

Directorate of Public Instructions Elementary and Secondary Education

Govt. Boys Primary School Naluchi Muzaffarabad Contact#: 0344-1914510



DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 118


10. Ms. AbidaKousar

Head Teacher, Govt. Girls Secondary School


Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School Lower Chatter Muzaffaabad Phone:05822-960805 Cell# :0306-561096 Email:[email protected]

11. Mr. Asghar Ali Abbasi

Head Teacher, Govt. Boys Secondary School


Ali akbar Awan Govt. Boys Model High School Upper Chatter Muzaffarabad Phone: 05822-960806

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 119

Respondents from Gilgit-Baltistan (GB)


1

Mr. Majeed Khan Director General Schools, GB

Directorate of Education, Gilgit, (GB), Pakistan

Cell: 0355-5550290 Email: [email protected] Office Address : Directorate of Education Gilgit Baltistan JamatkhanBazar near NLI marketGilgit, GB

2

Mr. Afzal Khan Deputy Director, EMIS


Phone: 0581-1960292 Cell: 0355-5552604 Email: [email protected] Office Address : Directorate of Education Gilgit Baltistan JamatkhanBazar near NLI marketGilgit, GB

3

Faqir Muhammad Director Curriculum& Text Books


05811-960292 Office Address : Directorate of Education Gilgit Baltistan JamatkhanBazar near NLI marketGilgit, GB

4

Faqir Muhammad Director Teachers Training


05811-960292 Office Address : Directorate of Education Gilgit Baltistan JamatkhanBazar near NLI marketGilgit, GB

5 KachoManzoor Director Basic Education

Community Schools, Gilgit- (GB) Pakistan

Phone: 05811-960292 BECS Head Office Near FCNA Main Gate JutialGilgit- GB

6

Mr. Shah Azam Khan Sr. Manager School Development

Age Khan Education Services Pakistan (AKESP), (GB), Pakistan

Cell: 0340-6244111 Aga Khan Education Services , University Road Khonodass , Gilgit (GB)

7

Mr. Ijlal Hussain General Manager- NCHD

National Commission for Human Development (NCHD) , Gilgit, (GB) , Pakistan

Cell: 0346-5006809 [email protected] NCHD Office Naveed Shaheed RaodZulfiaqarabadJutialGilgit (GB)

8

Mr. Farman Karm Head Teacher, Private Secondary School Gilgit

Academy of Excellence Secondary School – Gilgit, (GB) , Pakistan

Cell: 05811- 459533 The Academy of Excellence Gilgit- Naveed Shaheed Road ZulfiqarabadGilgit (GB)

9

ShamaMiraj Head Teacher, Govt. Girls Secondary School


Phone No: 05811-960643 Government Girls High School KashroteGilgit , Main Babar Road , KashroeteGilgit, GB

10

Sherzad Ali Head Teacher, Govt. Boys Secondary School Gilgit


Phone No: 05811-960372 Government Boys High Schools No-1 Gilgit ,Kashamiri Bazar Road Near GPO Gilgit (GB) .

11

AamirYousaf Head Teacher, Primary School

Shining Lights Academy Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan

Phone No: 0511 451008 [email protected] Shining Lights Academy , Shahrah e quaidAzam Near JutialGilgit GB

12 Naib Khan Head Teacher,

Secondary Aga Khan DJ School, Danyore, Giligt , (GB),

Cell No: 05811-456028 Aga Khan Education Service DJ





DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 120


School Pakistan Model School Danyore , Near Baig Market DanyoreGilgit, (GB)

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 121

Annex 3: Questionnaires/ Tools of Data Collection

Attached separately

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 122

Annex 4: Contribution of Key UN Agencies/ INGO’s for Implementing MSQE

UNESCO

• UNESCO was one of the contributing agency towards the development of MSQE. It is currently implementing the following education programmes in Pakistan, some directly and some indirectly contributing to quality education. For programs/projects implementation, the minimum standards for quality education developed by the Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training are fully adhered to, which includes input, output and process standards.

Girls Right to Education Programme (GREP) Malala Fund Funding: $6.747 million Donor: Government of Pakistan Matching Fund: $6.139 million

Educate a Child (Qatar Foundation) MOU signed: 29 May 2017 Duration: July 2015-Dec. 2020 Target: 100,000 out of school primary school children

Donor: Korean International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) Funding: $3.400 million MOU signed: March 23, 2018 Duration: 3 year effective March 2018-2021 District: Bahawalpur, Muzafarabad, Astore and Ghanche Focus: Enrolment, retention and quality of girl’s primary education

Donor: Italian Agency for Development Cooperation (AICS) Funding: $ 1,768,868 million

(Education $1,297,170 m, Culture $ 471,698 m) MOU signed: August 7, 2017 Duration: 2 year effective Sep. 2017- Sep, 2019 District: Bahawalpur, Swat Focus: Enrolment, retention and quality of girls primary education

• UNESCO is supporting Government of Pakistan in mainstreaming SDG 4/ Education 2030 agenda into national education policies and education sector plan.

• For monitoring of SDG-4,UNESCO has provided technical inputs to Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS) on data collection instruments of PSLM, UNESCO also support federal and provincial education departments in monitoring of SDG-4 through engagement with NEMIS, AEPAM and NEAS for monitoring

• During implementation of the projects/ programmes, close coordination with government is ensured through the platform of Programme Steering Committee (PSC), National Programme Coordination Committee (NPCC) and Provincial Project Monitoring

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 123

Committee (PPMC). The PPMC meetings are held either quarterly or bi annually while the PSC and NPCC meetings are usually held on yearly basis or on need basis.

• The UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) is the statistical office of UNESCO and is the UN depository for cross-nationally comparable statistics on education, science and technology, culture, and communication. details can be found on the following link http://uis.unesco.org/country/PK

• Global Education Monitoring (GEM) Report https://en.unesco.org/gem-report/statistics is regular publication which provides details on all progress on SDG – 4 indicators including learning outcome and other quality related indicators. Under SDG-4 target 4.1, the following data on indicators is reported

o Learning minimum proficiency for o Early grade , o End primary , o End lower secondary

Annex 5: References

1. Minimum Standards for Quality Education in Pakistan 2016 (MSQE)

http://moent.gov.pk/mopttm/userfiles1/file/Minimum%20Standards%20for%20Quality

%20Education%20in%20Pakistan.pdf

2. National Education Policy 2009 (NEP)

http://www.moent.gov.pk/policiesDetails.aspx

3. National Educational Policy Framework 2018 (NEPF)


4. National Education Policy 2017 (Draft) (NEP)

http://www.moent.gov.pk/userfiles1/file/National%20Educaiton%20Policy%202017.pdf

5. Pakistan Economic Survey 2017-18 (PES)

http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_18/10-Education.pdf

6. Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19

http://finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_19/Economic_Survey_2018_19.pdf

7. Punjab School Education Sector Plan 2013-2017 (PSESP)

http://aserpakistan.org/document/learning_resources/2014/Sector_Plans/Punjab%20Se

ctor%20Plan%202013-2017.pdf

8. KPK School Sector Plan 2015-2020 (KPSSP)

http://i-saps.org/upload/report_publications/docs/1431515099.pdf

http://uis.unesco.org/country/PK

https://en.unesco.org/gem-report/statistics

http://moent.gov.pk/mopttm/userfiles1/file/Minimum%20Standards%20for%20Quality%20Education%20in%20Pakistan.pdf

http://moent.gov.pk/mopttm/userfiles1/file/Minimum%20Standards%20for%20Quality%20Education%20in%20Pakistan.pdf



http://www.moent.gov.pk/userfiles1/file/National%20Educaiton%20Policy%202017.pdf

http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_18/10-Education.pdf

http://finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_19/Economic_Survey_2018_19.pdf

http://aserpakistan.org/document/learning_resources/2014/Sector_Plans/Punjab%20Sector%20Plan%202013-2017.pdf

http://aserpakistan.org/document/learning_resources/2014/Sector_Plans/Punjab%20Sector%20Plan%202013-2017.pdf


DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 124

9. Annual Statistical Report of Government Schools 2017-18, Department of Elementary

and Secondary Education, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa


10. National Education Policy 2016 – AJK (NEP AJK)

https://itacec.org/document/2016/nep/AJK_Report_NEP.pdf

11. Balochistan Education Sector Plan 2013-2018 (BESP)

http://emis.gob.pk/Uploads/Balochistan%20Education%20Sector%20Plan.pdf

12. Gilgit-Baltistan Education Strategy 2015-2030 (GBES)

http://gbdoe.edu.pk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Gilgit-Baltistan-Education-Strategy-

2015-30.pdf

13. Sindh Education Sector Plan 2014-2018 (SESP)

http://www.sindheducation.gov.pk/Contents/Menu/Final%20SESP.pdf

14. Public Financing of Education in Pakistan, Analysis of Federal, Provincial and District

Budgets 2010-11 to 2016-17, Institute of Social and Policy Sciences (I-SAPS), Islamabad


15. Government Allocations for Education in Pakistan, AlifAilaan

https://www.alifailaan.pk/budget_allocation_2015

16. Quality and Effectiveness of Public Spending on Education in Pakistan

http://www.sbp.org.pk/publications/staff-

notes/QualityEffectivenessPublicEducationSpendingEducationPakistan.pdf

17. Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) Pakistan 2018

http://aserpakistan.org/index.php

18. Report of the Committee on Education Sector Reforms in Pakistan, Federal

Ombudsman’s Secretariat, Islamabad (2018)

http://www.mohtasib.gov.pk/images/pdfs/REFORM_REPORT.pdf

19. 2013-2018 Five Years of Education Reforms in the Punjab. Wins, Losses and Challenges

for 2018-2023, AlifAilaan

https://elections.alifailaan.pk/wp-includes/file/PunjabEducationReport18.pdf


https://itacec.org/document/2016/nep/AJK_Report_NEP.pdf

http://emis.gob.pk/Uploads/Balochistan%20Education%20Sector%20Plan.pdf



http://www.sindheducation.gov.pk/Contents/Menu/Final%20SESP.pdf


https://www.alifailaan.pk/budget_allocation_2015

http://www.sbp.org.pk/publications/staff-notes/QualityEffectivenessPublicEducationSpendingEducationPakistan.pdf

http://www.sbp.org.pk/publications/staff-notes/QualityEffectivenessPublicEducationSpendingEducationPakistan.pdf

http://aserpakistan.org/index.php

http://www.mohtasib.gov.pk/images/pdfs/REFORM_REPORT.pdf

https://elections.alifailaan.pk/wp-includes/file/PunjabEducationReport18.pdf

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 125

20. 2013-2018 Five Years of Education Reforms in Sindh. Wins, Losses and Challenges for

2018-2023, AlifAilaan

https://elections.alifailaan.pk/wp-includes/file/SindhEducationReport18.pdf

21. 2013-2018 Five Years of Education Reforms in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Wins, Losses and

Challenges for 2018-2023, AlifAilaan

https://elections.alifailaan.pk/wp-includes/file/KpEducationReport18.pdf

22. 2013-2018 Five Years of Education Reforms in Balochistan. Wins, Losses and Challenges

for 2018-2023, AlifAilaan

https://elections.alifailaan.pk/balochistan-education-report/

23. Ahmed, Imtiaz & Athar Hussain, Muhammad. (2014). National Education Policy (NEP-

2009-2015) in Pakistan: Critical analysis and a way forward. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities. 53-II. 53-60. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284716681_National_Education_Policy_NEP- 2009-2015_in_Pakistan_Critical_analysis_and_a_way_forward

24. Ejaz, N. (2009) National Education Policy 2009 – A Critique [Online]. Available:

https://www.interface.edu.pk/students/Sep-09/Education-policy-Youth-activity-

centres.asp

25. UNESCO (2017), Sustainable Development Goal 4- Gap Analysis

(Draft)http://www.unesco.org.pk/education/documents/2018/DRAFT_PK_SDG-

4_Gap_Analysis.pdf

26. Ahmad, Rauf, Imdadullah& Zeb. (2012) Implementation Gaps in Educational Policies of Pakistan: Critical Analysis of Problems and Way Forward. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science. [Online]. Available: http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_2_No_21_November_2012/28.pdf

27. Saleemi, I. (2010). Pakistan Education: Problems And Solutions

http://www.einfopedia.com/pakistan-education-problems-and-solutions-of-pakistan-

education.php

28. UNICEF (June 2000), Defining Quality in Education https://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/UNICEF_Defining_Quality_Education_2000.PDF

29. PSLM 2013-14 http://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files//pslm/publications/pslm2013_14/A%20repor

t%2013-14%28%2012-05-15%29_FInal_1.pdf

https://elections.alifailaan.pk/wp-includes/file/SindhEducationReport18.pdf

https://elections.alifailaan.pk/wp-includes/file/KpEducationReport18.pdf

https://elections.alifailaan.pk/balochistan-education-report/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284716681_National_Education_Policy_NEP-%092009-2015_in_Pakistan_Critical_analysis_and_a_way_forward

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284716681_National_Education_Policy_NEP-%092009-2015_in_Pakistan_Critical_analysis_and_a_way_forward

https://www.interface.edu.pk/students/Sep-09/Education-policy-Youth-activity-centres.asp

https://www.interface.edu.pk/students/Sep-09/Education-policy-Youth-activity-centres.asp

http://www.unesco.org.pk/education/documents/2018/DRAFT_PK_SDG-4_Gap_Analysis.pdf

http://www.unesco.org.pk/education/documents/2018/DRAFT_PK_SDG-4_Gap_Analysis.pdf

http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_2_No_21_November_2012/28.pdf

http://www.einfopedia.com/pakistan-education-problems-and-solutions-of-pakistan-education.php

http://www.einfopedia.com/pakistan-education-problems-and-solutions-of-pakistan-education.php

https://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/UNICEF_Defining_Quality_Education_2000.PDF

https://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/UNICEF_Defining_Quality_Education_2000.PDF

http://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files/pslm/publications/pslm2013_14/A%20report%2013-14%28%2012-05-15%29_FInal_1.pdf

http://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files/pslm/publications/pslm2013_14/A%20report%2013-14%28%2012-05-15%29_FInal_1.pdf

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 126

DATE 01/07/2019 ISSUE: 2.0

UNDP-IC-2018-285 Page | 127

acknowledgements...date 01/07/2019 issue: 2.0 ii acknowledgements this report has been produced by...

Documents